It doesn't solve anything directly, but it's an attack on the prosperity of the people who are maintaining artificial restrictions on new construction.

A laissez-faire approach to both construction and rent would probably be a better option. But that's already not happening, and it's not going to happen without pressuring homeowners and landlords to stop opposing construction.

AKA ignore the entire foundation of the previous poster's point?

Edit: upon re-reading your comment I think maybe you don't know what the phrase 'Turnabout is fair play.' means.

https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/turnabout_is_fair_play

Now, if we're talking about planned cities built in the 80s in orange county, maybe we have a point! Maybe.

SF has a similar story of sorts. Building code regulations were heavily relaxed after the 1906 earthquake in fear that people wouldn't rebuild otherwise.

Businesses will build whatever is most profitable. If it's more profitable to de-regulate and unzone everything, then they would be lobbying like hell to get that.