The article you linked is informative, though I still think it fails to address the major pitfalls of the YIMBY model. If the YIMBY model is to work for poor and working class communities, developers must be incentivized to build affordable housing for low-income people. There is little reason for them to do that when they can build high-end housing for the wealthy and make more money.

The YIMBY model is built upon the idea of trickle-down housing (when better housing is built, the rich will leave their nice homes for them, and then low-income people can move into their previous housing). But, just like trickle-down economics, this doesn’t usually work in the real world. Instead the rich take multiple homes, rent out their old home at a high rent price, or they simply remain in their homes and these new high-end developments go empty. Even if certain instances of trickle-down housing do work, it is highly inefficient. On top of construction time (which all models have) you also have to wait for the rich to make their moves, which can add years to the process.

The article you linked is based on the idea that public housing will be the same as it’s been in the past, but this doesn’t need to be the case. The Vienna model in particular holds great promise with their idea of social housing—government owned land is sold to private companies which then own and operate housing with public oversight. Social housing is also placed in desirable areas and meets health and safety standards. It is available to people of all incomes. Higher-income people pay market prices which subsidize the cheaper rents of low-income people.

Low-income people cannot rely on the flaky goodwill of the rich in order for their lives to improve. Instead of tax dollars being given to developers who build housing inaccessible to most of us, we need to realize that housing is a human right and shouldn’t be left up to the free market. The free market rarely helps those that need it the most. If we are, first and foremost, trying to help low-income people, then social housing is the better model.

There was a comment above that you are a realtor. If this is so, it seems suspect to me as a low-income person that you would promote a model on the idea of its morals when more free market housing would allow you to make more money. Are you honestly trying to help low-income people? Or are you trying to live in a world that doesn’t exist where you can say you’ve helped low-income people while increasing your net-worth? I hope it’s the former, and I hope you change your mind on the best model to do so. All the best.

(Edited: twice for clarity)