Pretty much. I'm progressive on a lot of issues but many public-interest minded people are immune to economic realities. The example about subsidized versus market-rate housing is a great one. Subsidized housing reducing displacement twice as effectively as a market-rate house sounds great. But put another way: permitting two market-rate houses that bring in tax additional tax revenue is as effective as building a subsidized unit, which costs the government a bunch of money.
The "trickle down" effect is also real.
> Building more market rate housing isn’t so much about “trickle down” as it is building enough new housing to keep higher income households from moving down-market and bidding up the price of older housing that would otherwise be affordable to moderate and lower income households.
In Chicago, which has never had rent controls, there are tons of high-end highrises going up. But the high-end units there were built in the 1970's and 1980's have been retargeted now as more value offerings.