[pessimizer]

The premise is that the author is a libertarian, except that housing in the neighborhood they live in should be fixed at the price that they can afford, and that the character of the neighborhood from the point that they moved into it should be preserved.

It's only real gentrification when upper-middle class YIMBYs get forced out.

[tolerance]

This may be a non-sequitur to your point—and what I'm reading as a put-down makes me less likely to read the fine article that I indeed have not (to the credit of the potency of the point that I hope I'm grasping).

Between AI and whatever housing problems are being felt by co-founders and advisors and chairs at posh institutions, the flattening of the upper-middle class is a sight to behold.

[burlesona]

What I said is this is what I struggle with. In general I think too much regulation is what caused this problem. And the question on my mind is, from where we are today, is there a liberalization of the rules that would also help maintain a mixed income neighborhood, rather than the current trajectory (quickly becoming an uber-wealthy country club).

[hn_throwaway_99]

Except that's not what the author argued, at all.

The author acknowledges that a lot of the gentrification is the result of zoning rules, and has only proposed what are primarily less restrictive zoning rules as a potential solution.

[9x39]

Eh, let's take their word for it: >But I’d like to see new homes sold at prices I could conceivably afford.

Doesn't gentrification happen not from spontaneous combos of zoning rules but when someone with money wants to live somewhere, so they do? It's part of the golden rule: he with the gold makes all the rules, unless you can go asymmetric economic warfare and fire back with zoning & NIMBY laws.