Rate of population growth (migration) is the demand side of the "real problem".
And a slower rate of growth seems to have more benefits than fast growth with reduced building restrictions.
Arguably the housing supply shortage is a better problem to have than a population shortage problem ie Japan. The supply shortage can be amended with construction. The population shortage ... not so easy. There are many problems with a declining, aging, shrinking population. Particularly the distribution in the economy between the retirees that need to be taken care of and the workers in the economy that contribute to the economy. Many western countries would face similar problems if not for immigrations since birth rates are falling.
I've heard this taking point often, but from the perspective of a resident in Japan (rather than an investor) is really not leading to observable negatives for the people... Housing and land prices are lowering, wages are increasing, and investment in working environments and labour savings technology is high... Maybe the worst is yet to come, but at the moment it looks like an overall benefit for the majority.
Migration is a very minor contributor overall. Longevity and birth rate are the main drivers of the housing crisis. Boomers squirted out the largest generation ever and then forgot to die.
Intercity/ interstate migration is a huge contributor to the pressure in major US cities. If NYC or SF were 1/4th the cost I would move there immediately, but the value would be marginal at this point.
SF has only enjoyed positive net domestic migration for one single year in living memory. Domestic migration is absolutely not a driver of housing costs in San Francisco. Over the last 40 years San Francisco has consistently failed to build enough housing for its endogenous population growth due to longevity and births.