> Housing is a market where there's extremely little productivity gains available for improving the size of the pie as a whole - at best you can improve energy

> Housing is a market where there's extremely little productivity gains available for improving the size of the pie as a whole - at best you can improve energy efficiency, commuting waste, or other non-valuable housing related consumption. If housing prices are rising in the area then generally (not always) there's more demand for housing than supply. Increased density generally leads to increased economic activity (more housing = more residents = more commercial activity = higher tax revenue.) Viewing the housing market in isolation is a mistake. > But if all you're doing is making housing more financially affordable, you're going to have to deal with the fact that Peter's financial savings is Paul's lost rent-seeking, and Paul is generally a pensioner that votes. Yes and that's the problem. Veto powers in most residential politics tend to be strong and so Paul's veto generally overrides Paul's demand.