California statistics indicates that artificially constraining housing supply has created housing costs that in effect limits access to the rare opportunities found here to blacks and latinos as well as the poor.

It makes it almost impossible to grow up with lower middle class parents or work in a low-pay low-skilled position, and mingling with the tech crowd to work your way up.

* A snapshot of more recent U.S. Census migration numbers shows that nearly three-quarters of those who have left California for other states since 2007 earn less than $50k a year.

* San Francisco's African American population has declined from 13.4% of the population in 1970 to 6.1%

* 41 percent of San Franciscans spend 30 to 50 percent on rent, despite a lot of rent control for longer-tenure residents and a population average income being $104k as well as median $77k

* low skilled entry level jobs are moved elsewhere https://www.google.com.tw/amp/s/www.wired.com/2016/03/those-....

I understand that this might not be the intended consequence for all people fighting for the current zoning rules, but due to its effects on blacks and latinos as well as the poor I find the effects immoral.

Anyone supporting these policies knowing this has the right to do so, but not while at the same time claiming they fight for diversity and the dispossessed.

How is stopping someone from making their own house one story taller an acceptable use of the power of the state?

The default mode of government should be to get out of the way unless there is a super compelling interest to do otherwise. I don't believe that the desire of people to live in unchanging suburbs is all that compelling. We living in a country with a growing and urbanizing population. These changes might make some people sad. Tough.