[btilly]

No. It really is that your view is wrong, and not that you simply failed to convey it.

You glimpse the problem at the end, only to dismiss it. Your glimpse is when you say:

> Now, NIMBYs using government fiat to drive down housing supply in their market is an annoyingly common failure mode of local democracy, maybe that's all you're upset about.

The triangle that you're looking at is that NIMBYs lead to lack of construction, lead to undersupply of housing, which is a direct cost of both high housing costs and high homeless populations. The profit that I have as a homeowner comes from somewhere. Where it comes from is artificial scarcity that causes renters to struggle, and over 170,000 Californians to be unhoused.

Looking at that without guilt, is like New Englanders whose families made a fortune investing in the triangle trade, congratulating themselves on not having been those evil slave owners. Sorry, but it is tied together. You cannot both profit from the crime, and disclaim a portion of responsibility for it at the same time.

[psunavy03]

Ah, the internet. Where homeownership is unironically being compared to slave trading.