> You are outrageously ignorant of the causes of homelessness if you think that the people you see on the street can afford or will stay in any of the new developments.

The YIMBY approach to homelessness is just a modern form of trickle-down economics. You see, if only there were more properties for Uber/Twitter/startup millionaires, which they could buy for $3m instead of $4m, then they wouldn't drive up the price of those $2m properties, and then ...<iterate several times>... all those unhoused people on SF sidewalks would have a place to live!

> The YIMBY approach to homelessness is just a modern form of trickle-down economics

Trickle-down economics is the theory that giving money to people with lower propensity to spend it (the rich) will somehow lead to more economic activity (which is obviously wrong). I don't see how that's at all connected to the idea that more supply of a good leads to lower prices for that good.

The trickle-down is that very often (and I'm not referring here to this article, but more broadly) the new housing being discussed is not for low-income. It's for the highest-tier, with the idea that when the richest have more housing options, that makes room for the slightly-less rich, then the just-kinda rich, then the very well off... and eventually this trickles down to there being affordable housing for the homeless. Trickle-down.

The misconception you have here is that the cost of the housing is driven by how "high tier" it is. It's not, it's driven by land costs. That's why even a fairly old plain apartment in SF is still very expensive to rent, and houses that are completely ordinary in Silicon Valley are millions to buy. As an example, would you consider this $1.5M house "high tier"? https://www.zillow.com/homedetails/879-San-Ardo-Way-Mountain...

There's not really a way to make low cost housing beyond either high supply, or subsidization.

> please promptly emigrate to China

Actually you would be the one who is going to be forced to emigrate to another country, if you disagree.

The law changed. And now people are going to be able to do what they want, with their own property. And you have no ability to stop them.

People who can pay high prices will either pay them for the existing buildings or the newer fancier buildings. New buildings frees up the existing buildings for others to live in. Nobody thinks building luxury apartments is necessary so people can move from the street to a new luxury apartment - they think it is necessary so that people can move from the street to one of thousands of average apartments.