In the interest of making your argument stronger, it may be worth addressing that when folks discuss housing shortages, they mean "affordable housing shortages"

In the interest of making your argument stronger, it may be worth addressing that when folks discuss housing shortages, they mean "affordable housing shortages". It's generally good policy to argue towards the strongest and most charitable interpretation of a counter argument if your goal is to persuade. As a counter to your statement: I believe the crux of the issue is not just more housing, though having more housing available for low and middle class workers is important, but the fact that we (the US) as a country have a bit of a paradox in how we think about hosing: 1. We generally want everyone to be able to afford to have some kind of shelter. 2. We expect all real estate to increase in value over time. We can't have both, but until we change how we think about real estate and it's role as an asset, we're unlikely to have a robust, long term solution to a lack of housing that's affordable to the average worker.