[seanmcdirmid]

> I really hope we don't have indefinite large amounts of US population growth.

You don't need indefinite growth. People generally want to live in a few cities; e.g. they don't really want to live in Toledo, they want to live in San Deigo. So you just have to let people live where they want to live, not where they have to lvie.

> Then consider this particular argument not that you can build to a nebulously defined "affordable", but that you can build to "San Diego has between 100% and 1000% of its current population with rent 40% lower than it is right now".

That has literally never happened before and I don't see how it will happen first in San Diego. Mega cities get more expensive, not cheaper, as they grow, since the concentration of human capital and jobs make it even more valuable to live there.

[Dylan16807]

I'll put it this way. If 10-20 popular cities try to outbuild their population growth with a cap of 16 million people each, at least some of them will succeed. Three quarters of the US population isn't going to move into 10-20 cities.

The only way that general idea fails is if the demand concentrates so strongly into a couple megacities that we don't even have 10-20 non-obsolete cities left. That seems unlikely to me.