Did you all read the Voice of San Diego article by Rich? He listed 3 reasons that people believed there is a housing shortage, and shot them all down. The population was declining, builders had cut back on construction while letting inventory build up, and there was a temporary disconnect between supply and demand as buyers outnumbered sellers. So basically, the article states there is no housing shortage, and there never was.
Now read the letters to the editor. Lew Breeze, a realtor who is associated with downtown condos, quotes this article as a preface to his letter to the editor that advice given over the last few years to postpone buying a home would have prevented a buyer from gaining on the spectacular rise in appreciation. Mr. Breeze doesn't think we'll see a major price correction, and concludes this was not an attack on the author. It wasn't, but it had nothing to do with the article about the housing shortage. Why did he write the letter? Just to make a point that he disagrees with everything that Rich has to say. He didn't make any intelligent counterpoint to the 3 reasons that Rich raised in his article.
Next, there is a letter from Mark Smith in San Diego. He critiques Rich's piece for not addressing the lack of affordable housing. Ok, I guess that would be a different story, but is not quite on the topic of the myth of the housing shortage. That myth has created some of the unreasonable demand which caused prices to skyrocket beyond their actual value. How does the myth of the housing shortage affect the lack of affordable housing? Is he saying there really is a housing shortage, but it is in the area of affordable housing? Is he saying that when someone tries to educate about the housing bubble they must also make suggestions for solving the affordability problem? Perhaps Rich could conclude his article with, "Once the housing bubble bursts, housing will be affordable for everyone." Perhaps that would please Mr. Smith.
I think when people quote articles, they should make a valid contribution to that particular article and the data and opinions that pertain to that article, instead of just using the article as a jumping point to convey their own views.