>>1993874It is currently unaffordable to live in close to major job centers, IE urban areas, because there is not enough housing in those areas. The YIMBY platform is literally to densify those areas. More housing in desirable areas = lower prices for housing. It is literally as simple as supply and demand.
>If I’m only able to go to one within walking distance you bet they’ll put the prices upFirst off, what would prevent you from shopping at a store several miles away as opposed to across the street? Second, stores charge what the market will bear. If they're somehow so expensive that it makes sense for people to bike/drive/take transit to somewhere farther away, they won't be in business for long.
>Then you’ve got the fact that rich people will get all the best stuff while the poorer of society will have second rate servicesAs already happens now because incumbent landowners vehemently lobby against building new homes while their own home values skyrocket and working class people get pushed to the periphery? And then they have the temerity to bitch about their property taxes being high? Miss me with that bullshit, even under the current broken property tax system in the US more density would mean more city revenue, and ergo a greater ability to fund police, fire departments, transit, and other city services. Land-value tax reform, which is another part of the YIMBY platform, would go even further in ensuring that incumbent landowners are paying their share by making them pay the value of their land, not the value of whatever shitty parking lot or crackhouse is sitting on it. Land is finite, so it makes sense that if you want to keep a valuable plot of land near downtown for your own personal use, you should be paying for that luxury. Otherwise, you can get yourself a cheaper plot outside the city and commute in. That's a tradeoff you can make.