Housing unaffordability isn't a market malfunction but a result of political decisions that incentivize rising prices to benefit homeowners, who are a powerful voting bloc. This restricts supply and blocks development, creating an intergenerational crisis.

There is a fundamental conflict in housing policy: making homes affordable by increasing supply would lower prices, devaluing the single largest asset for the massive voting bloc of current homeowners. Politicians are therefore incentivized to maintain high prices.

High home prices should not be interpreted as a sign of a healthy market. Instead, they indicate a system that is malfunctioning as designed, where artificial scarcity created by policy and corporate buying drives prices up. This reflects a structural failure, not robust economic demand.

Policies intended to curb luxury development, such as a construction freeze, have a counterintuitive effect. They transform the existing luxury housing stock into a limited, finite resource. This artificial scarcity dramatically drives up prices for those assets, making them 'gold' and potentially worsening inequality.

Housing scarcity is a bottom-up cycle where homeowners' financial incentive is to protect their property value (NIMBYism). They then vote for politicians who enact restrictive building policies, turning personal financial interests into systemic regulatory bottlenecks.

Drew Warshaw frames the "Not In My Backyard" (NIMBY) phenomenon as a rational, if selfish, economic decision. Incumbent homeowners are incentivized to restrict new housing supply because basic economics suggest that increasing supply could decrease the value of their primary asset: their home.

The "Not In My Backyard" (NIMBY) phenomenon isn't born from malice. It's driven by older homeowners, who view their house as their primary retirement fund, acting out of self-preservation. They lobby for policies that increase their home's value, without considering the broader economic consequences.

Homeowners and local governments block new development, creating artificial scarcity that drives up prices, similar to how luxury brands like LVMH restrict supply to increase value. This "LVMH-ing" of housing makes it unaffordable for younger generations and limits economic mobility.

Politicians at all levels actively restrict housing supply through zoning and other policies. This is not incompetence, but a deliberate strategy to protect and inflate property values, which satisfies the large and reliable homeowner voting bloc, ensuring re-election at the expense of renters and future buyers.