> “The idea that upzoning will cause housing affordability to trickle down \[ ... \] is just a lot to promise” Increasing housing supply is not the same thing

> “The idea that upzoning will cause housing affordability to trickle down \[ ... \] is just a lot to promise” Increasing housing supply is not the same thing as trickle down. It confuses the issue to call it this. Trickle down refers to the idea of giving out money (in the form of tax breaks) to stimulate the economy. It essentially says that cash handouts to businesses and investors will indirectly make it into poorer people's hands. Removing limits on housing is fundamentally different than this because there is no handout involved. Instead of rich people receiving money, rich people (also called investors) put up money to finance the costs of increasing the supply. Also, nobody is saying that increasing supply will eliminate inequality. That part is kind of a straw man. Real estate is still "location, location, location", and living in a desirable area (near jobs, etc.) will continue to cost more. What increasing supply does is change one multiplier on costs. In my mind, the relevant question to ask is: if affordability is a big problem, why wouldn't you want to turning one of the knobs you can turn to change a multiplier and make it better?