@charliejane That's a lot of questions to answer. I think of it like this: Rent = Jobs/houses, adjusted for the % who commute. When you add high-income jobs without adding nice houses to match, as we have been doing, the high-income people will price out existing low-income tenants.
@charliejane Rent control limits this somewhat, but eviction, condo conversion, and other workarounds mean that high-income newcomers, if not given other places to live, will price out many existing low-income tenants.
@charliejane So the effect of limiting market-rate housing supply mostly won't be techies staying in Cupertino. It will be store clerks moving to Daly City or to the East Bay.
@charliejane This is why I focus on market-rate housing over affordable housing. It's not because I care about high earners more. It's because I want to "catch" them and divert them before they ever get to the low-income neighborhoods.
@charliejane Affordable housing is nice, but fundamentally it's a mitigation measure. Low-income families get displaced by high-earners and have to move into subsidized housing. That's better than having nowhere to move, sure. But having to move SUCKS.
@charliejane If we could take all the incoming coders and stick them in nice little fishbowls in SoMa where they won't displace anybody, that seems pretty optimal to me!
