Like,

People desperately want the idea that building is bad to be true and I have no idea why. Buildings are obviously necessary, a growing population obviously needs a growing number of buildings. Yet so much mental acrobatics to justify blocking them

New buildings are nicer than old buildings, especially now (not necessarily true in earlier decades) which you can tell because people will pay more to live in them. Yet we hate the idea of new buildings replacing dusty lots!

I don't think anyone thinks it's a panacea but there's no actual costs to allowing other people to use their own money to build more houses so it's exasperating to see it treated like a trade-off for doing homelessness services or whatever https://twitter.com/panndder/status/1340336552937992192?s=19

The supposed trade-off is that it causes gentrification but it's easy to observe gentrification happening fastest in cities that have the most restrictive development regimes

I have no idea what world people are living in where the alternative to upzoning a dusty lot is "wonderful social housing gets built there instead" and not "a developer just builds fewer units in the smaller zoning envelope" or "it remains a dusty lot" https://twitter.com/panndder/status/1340337862177411074

"You're blocking our wonderful non-market-rate housing projects by tying up the land in market rate housing" there are essentially zero of those types of projects happening anywhere in the USA it's like opposing agriculture because they're destroying unicorn habitats