> It's surprising to me that we aren't heavily subsidizing the development of high density apartments Maybe a first step is to legalize higher density construc

> It's surprising to me that we aren't heavily subsidizing the development of high density apartments Maybe a first step is to legalize higher density constructions in general - allow using a larger percentage of the same lot, subdivided into more units, all by right without the need to obtain exceptions from your local zoning board and without the chance for your neighbors to veto the development. If it were dirt simple to replace a single family home on a large lot with multiple homes on subdivisions of the lot, by right, for literally every single neighborhood in the state, we would avoid this cat and mouse game where everyone wants higher density until it comes to their neighborhood, because in their neighborhood the {traffic, schools, transit, lack of transit, sewer infrastructure, environmental concern, blocking sunlight, blocking view, etc} situation is too precarious to take the risk, so we need everyone to move somewhere else Even if we want the government to take heavy action to spur more construction, part of the reason every developer builds luxury housing is because it's so damn expensive and risky just to get through the stuff that comes before construction even begins (and consequently, lots sit idle for years at a time going through approval). That idle capital needs a return, so the only viable construction is luxury. We can address this issue now, and so if we inject taxpayer dollars to address housing later they will be more efficiently used anyways