[raldi]

Which part of this chain do you think is the weak link?

1. If SF had typical land-use policies, it could build enough homes to accommodate twice its current population

2. If they did that, they'd be able to fill those homes with people

3. Those people, upon arriving, would have approximately the same productivity as current San Franciscans

4. SF would thus double its contribution to the US GDP

[robrenaud]

It's not as though those contributions come for free though. If talent leaves other places to go to NYC/SF/SJ, those other places become less productive.

[raldi]

Not necessarily, on a per-capita basis. If Alice has incredible pineapple-farming skills and is terrible at everything else, and she moves from Alaska to Hawaii, she improves both states' per-capita GDP.

[WillPostForFood]

1 is true, 2 and 3 might be true, but there are many variables that could lead to other outcomes. Double the density, you might lower the desirability, driving the current high GDP producers out. Then you have a downward spiral as revenue drops, incomes drop, rents drop, vacancies rise, crimes rises. Or it could be the next Tokyo. But there is no certainty.

[sukilot]

San Francisco has plenty of room for all the high GDP employees. They are paying high rent and pushing out low GDP employees.