I think for high demand urban centres/markets, this is just going to lead to Braess's paradox of more roads = more cars = more traffic. More units = more people

I think for high demand urban centres/markets, this is just going to lead to Braess's paradox of more roads = more cars = more traffic. More units = more people = more opporunities = maybe even higher rent. Unless there's ridiculous amount of oversupply. Perhaps greater NYC needs 60 million units to stablize price for 59M people that want to move there to reach the demand equilibirum of a overcrowded megacity 3x population of the current state. Gov needs to keep building units to put supply ahead of demand until until an urban centre becomes undesirable and people stop coming. Soon, ecumenopolis. E: over comment limit @Eisenstein They're not. I'm a fan of them. Like JP mega cities are relatively affordable with greater Tokyo having "reasonably" 22M people. But for US/west, highly desirable cities + high immigration, cities like NYC, I think has capacity draw/support people that push past what's stustainable based on regional geographic ceiling. NYC's already depend on stupidenous water transport infra. I feel (based on no evidence in particular) that NYC would grow to 40M people and run out of water, but rent stays the same/if not higher because there's even more opportunties and 80M people wants to move there.