This is because they build housing. San Francisco, London, New York, and Seattle all don't build housing and prices go up. [2]
If housing were easier to build people would build more affordable housing. No developer cares if they build expensive housing or affordable housing, they are maximizing return on investment. Turning a 1 story house into a 3 story house for a 30% return makes developers just as happy as developing 20 luxury condos for a 30% return.
And even those luxury condos provide housing for people who would otherwise buy old condos and renovate them. As long as the housing is more dense and there is more of it, prices will come down.
[1] https://resources.realestate.co.jp/buy/average-rent-in-japan...
[2] https://www.ft.com/content/023562e2-54a6-11e6-befd-2fc0c26b3...
https://m.fang.com/zf/sz/AGT_206834195.html?listtype=1&lists...
And rent control actually leads to shortages as mobility is reduced because of people staying in places longer than they would have otherwise. It also disincentivizes creation of new housing.
Greater supply is needed. That’s the bottom line.
Every time I hear "we need to protect poor from eviction by evil tech workers" I want to scream.
Yeah sure.. tech workers who make 150k+ are dreaming about moving in a shitty house in East Bay.
Boulding more affordable housing looks great in a political ad, but does not do shit to resolve the crisis
Nevermind the fact that the question here is about homelessness which is exacerbated when you lobby to mow down affordable SROs and rent controlled housing so some developers can rebuild luxury condos in their place.
How exactly will that help the homelessness problem?