This is an argument I see all the time from the supply & demand denier side of the housing argument, and I'm sorry but it's just so incredibly stupid. It would

This is an argument I see all the time from the supply & demand denier side of the housing argument, and I'm sorry but it's just so incredibly stupid. It would be like if someone was dying of dehydration, they drink a couple drops of water but are still dehydrated, then conclude oh well, I guess water is not what I need. If you're not going to address the quantities involved how can you possible conclude that it's not working? I know less about Toronto but to use San Francisco as an example, there were something like 150,000 new jobs added in the last decade and 20,000 new housing units built. Of course it's not solving the problem yet, it doesn't mean that we don't need more housing, exactly the opposite.