> Yet people still want to live in cities despite the price. Why is that? Because they get a value from that, and that value is reflected in higher land values

> Yet people still want to live in cities despite the price. Why is that? Because they get a value from that, and that value is reflected in higher land values Yep agreed. > Adding more supply of buildings doesn't make the land any cheaper. We don't need land to be any cheaper - we need more dwellings (apartments). Nobody cares about land prices in the middle of large cities (but developers), they care about apartment prices/rent. > In fact it would make it more expensive via agglomeration effects. If by agglomeration effects you mean zoning for allowing more buildings - yes, relaxed zoning laws increase land prices AND increase supply of apartments. This is a good thing for housing affordability! > So the issue for affordability is land value. This does not follow as I believe the previous points are incorrect. > This can be done by shifting taxes off of buildings and onto land. Land taxes are an excellent idea - because they encourage building the maximum number of apartments allowed (more housing => more supply => cheaper housing), rather that sitting on an empty block of land speculating (which does greater society no good). Feel free to correct me if I've missed something!