I agree with the point of diffuse benefits being under-appreciated. I do think that some parts of the YIMBY side at its worst sometimes downplays the rights of

I agree with the point of diffuse benefits being under-appreciated. I do think that some parts of the YIMBY side at its worst sometimes downplays the rights of the present land owners though, and I think your “enriches homeowners” comment plays into that. We need to respect and honor both sets of stakeholders. I think most homeowners are not money-grubbers as you suggest, they chose a particular neighborhood vibe because that is where they want to live, and they don’t want to lose that. That is valid! Moving house is incredibly disruptive, particularly considering school districts. (To be clear though, I do agree that YIMBY is directionally appropriate for most neighborhoods). One angle I don’t see discussed often is “rate of change”. I think some people would like to preserve their neighborhoods character indefinitely, and that is unrealistic clinging. But I don’t think it’s unreasonable to expect that if you buy a house in a quiet suburban neighborhood, that it’ll have that character for, say, a decade or maybe two while your kids grow up or whatever. I think a lot of infill can happen without changing the character too much, and this middle ground is probably hurt by polarization.