In what sense? Zero population growth, or incentivizing corporations to not congregate in only like six metro areas in the entire US or what?

In most developed countries experiencing population growth, it's mainly driven by immigration. That's pretty easy for a nation state to control.

For what it's worth, current policies in Europe may already be enough[0]:

> The EU-27’s population is projected to increase from 446.8 million in 2019 and peak to 449.3 million in 2026

The situation in China is apparently similar[1]:

> China’s population will peak in 2022 due to negative natural growth

[0] https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/statistics-explained/index.php...

[1] https://www.ft.com/content/28a1f975-8374-4b87-b2ba-2e60ddf20...

No, the lack of supply was intentionally created to stop "the demand issue", by which they meant "other people having children". And California certainly doesn't produce enough houses for even their own children; talk to any suburban boomer and they'll tell you 1. their kids have moved out of state and 2. their kids don't deserve to live near them and had better become millionaires first.

This was popularized by 70s books like Cities as Growth Engines and The Population Bomb, which IIRC also caused China to ruin their demographics by introducing the one-child program. It was recently parodied in movies by that Thanos guy. It is not your new idea that everyone else is ignoring.