I like the author's approach, as this problem really comes down to one of various interest groups and their interests and incentives. In the U.S., we subsidize home ownership through mortgage interest tax breaks and various other legislation and we treat homes as investments. Naturally then, most homeowners will want to continue to push for anything that increases the value of that investment and oppose anything that decreases it (e.g. building more housing).
It will be interesting to see how California's approach to this problem plays out. We have had local regulations and NIMBY groups forestall new construction/denser housing, but the state pushed through legislation to forcibly override those local blockers. Incentives should now be aligned for builders to build, but local homeowners will continue to fight against it because their incentives are not aligned.
It will be interesting to see how California's approach to this problem plays out. We have had local regulations and NIMBY groups forestall new construction/denser housing, but the state pushed through legislation to forcibly override those local blockers. Incentives should now be aligned for builders to build, but local homeowners will continue to fight against it because their incentives are not aligned.