That's one stupendously negative way to look at it. Obviously it varies project to project. In California, where I've worked up close with many old and new projects, the new ones are almost always far better off than the old-school projects in terms of safety, cleanliness, community activity, etc. And they provide a lot of market-rate and middle-income housing in addition to low-income and senior housing.

The point he's making is that even though it's better it's still not great for the people paying the premium.

It all stems from why should I subsidize my neighbors rent?

The problem isn't that I wish to not subsidize it, but it's a matter that I'm subsidizing it to a much greater relative extent than a rich person living in his own brownstone he paid $10mil for.