Your argument boils down to righteous dignity. You presume that it's below another person's dignity to live in, gasp, 500sqft. This is obviously nonsense. I've lived in less. It is important to understand that scaling down square footage is the simplest path to creating market-rate, sustainable, affordable housing
Seconded. Well researched goodie. He spoke with a wide variety of sources to get his data right. From essentially homeless to Eli Broad - the B in KB Homes.
Even if you allowed skyscrapers, most existing houses and buildings would be illegal because of code. The map on this particular page mentions it only looks at zoning, so it's still very valid.
But my point is saying "X amount of homes would be illegal to build" is completely pointless and just meant to rile people up. OF COURSE most buildings are illegal to build today. We don't build like we use to for a variety of reasons. Even if you forget about building code, there's also rules around minimum amount of affordable units that older buildings didn't need to follow. Zoning is a specific one and yes, it's often problematic and regressive. Let's focus on that.
The building code and fire code thing is not true. Building codes are actually very flexible. There are plenty of ways to build a building to look exactly like almost any old building and fully comply with all codes.
Look like old buildings? Sure. But actually be the same? No. Hell, the building I live in is less than 12 years old and the electric panel is no longer to code, the HVAC condensate line is no longer to code, the damn stairs are no longer to code, the freagin dryer vent is no longer to code. They were all to code when they were built.
The answer is because a resource is at play that is finite: land.
If all the productive land in an urban area is effectively owned by foreign investors and left to sit, then renters bid up the remaining dwellings until they're priced out of the area. It also becomes more expensive to build in that area so the housing stock can't keep up with demand. It's terrible to let a vital commodity lay to waste.
With enough zoning it absolutely is, not to mention the lead time required to permit and actually build it. Once built depreciation kicks in - housing isn't permanent. It's a consumable.
They also tend to move less and stay in the same district for a large percentage of their lives. It's a lot easier to vote if you only need to sign up once and the same process applies. If you're young and mobile, you're changing cities/counties/states and therefore less likely to keep up with the different races.
> What if there's a power outage or I forget to plug in my car overnight?
Is making a trip to a gas station just to fill your car up a good use of time? Or is it better to accept responsibility and make sure you've plugged it in at home? Have you ever forgotten to fill up your gas tank and been stuck on the road? C'mon.
