By hoarding housing, I mean "owning multiple units for your own living purposes" If you are renting out a property you own, that's not the same thing

The only way new housing opening up doesn't lead to downward filtering as people vacate cheaper, older units for newer ones is if they *also* retain their older unit and it doesn't get rented out

that is entirely the same thing lmao

In one, a unit is getting rented out. In another, it is remaining vacant Those are only the same things if you're an idiot

"no you see in one scenario a rich person sits on something to hoard value, and in the other scenario, a rich person sits on something to hoard value, it's very different"

Yes it is in fact very different when discussing housing prices in an area if a unit is being leased out or held vacant You are nowhere near as informed on this topic to warrant this level of smugness

If we are discussing the - empirically observed real world- filtering effect of Upper income tenants moving into new luxury homes and freeing up older, cheaper units for lower income tenants, driving down overall rent prices, whether the unit is vacated or not is actually very important???

because unless you're going to build so much housing that rent is lowered by like hundreds upon hundreds of dollars, that doesn't change the fact it's unaffordable lol

1) "if you can't solve a problem completely you shouldn't make things better at all" is a terrible mindset 2) I think we should build so much housing that rent is lowered by hundreds and hundreds of dollars

if rent in some city had been lowered by an amount measured in multiple hundreds of dollars just by building housing, would that change your mind?

sure if you can find a place where a 700sqft unit went from being 1450$ to 600$ then we can talk.

that's nearly a thousand dollars. you don't think, say, three hundred dollars a month makes a huge difference? enough to demonstrate the concept at least?