it's not true because banking is also tied into housing
here is one of the core components of the article:
"From 2000 to 2010 the U.S. had a surplus of 4.6 million housing units, while in the following decade there was a shortage of 1.3 million fewer units than population growth would demand. All combined, that nets out to a surplus of 3.3 million homes from 2000 to 2020."
the numbers in the 2000's had horrible banking practices, essentially DEI of mortgages, which lead to the ballooning of prices.... did we really have a surplus? curiously, 2010 was added into that timeframe, the market had already crashed and bottomed at that point, stats and lies and all that.
anecdotally, housing is a bit of a lost cause without ample mult family units. Any and EVERYTIME I see a building being built, it's luxury homes with luxury prices. That goes for 20 years ago when KB was still building mcmansions, to now, still building mcmansions, this is just how it is all throughout the world as living standards increase.
the argument that the article makes is that we have the supply, but not enough for the given income, and it's a weird twist on the subject, and it's not totally wrong, we are lacking supply of affordable housing