[qarlow]

> Sure basic economics tells us that increasing supply ought to drive down prices for everyone, but at the individual level it's tough for people to make the connection.

Basic economics tells us that more supply lowers prices if everything else remains the same. Which it won't if the area becomes more popular.

"The assumption behind a demand curve or a supply curve is that no relevant economic factors, other than the product’s price, are changing. Economists call this assumption ceteris paribus, a Latin phrase meaning 'other things being equal'. If all else is not held equal, then the laws of supply and demand will not necessarily hold."

https://www.khanacademy.org/economics-finance-domain/microec...

[jaredklewis]

But even in the case where the area becomes more popular, a larger supply will result in lower prices than if the area had become more popular and did not increase supply.

[qarlow]

Not necessarily and not from an economic perspective. One can argue that, but it depends on how building affects the market. For example by shifting demographics. But even so renters, without rent control, are only interested in the part of the market they can afford where they live. That is, the quantity supplied at their income level. Which is even more susceptible to changes. The assumption people are making about "basic economics" just aren't true. More supply just isn't a solid argument for affordability without supporting evidence, and especially not when it comes to housing.