I think the big issue is it's a lot harder to start social housing in 2024 when you have extremely limited historical action on it. But in general a city buyin

I think the big issue is it's a lot harder to start social housing in 2024 when you have extremely limited historical action on it. But in general a city buying real estate is a hedge on real estate prices increasing in that city, which can be extremely useful for city budgets if you have any costs associate with housing some portion of the population. Most cities of a certain size find they can't function without some amount of social housing: the free market prices out entire occupations that cities need. Even someone as non-essential as a Barista is actually quite important in that many of the people in NYC want to be able to buy coffee. But you aren't going to get Starbucks to pay the $20+ /hour needed for them to rent within a reasonable commute of where they live. There are also questions about how much of out of control rents employers are responsible for and should bear the cost of, and how much it is the cities fault. To the degree to which rental prices are high because of politician supported NIMBYism it seems fairer for city budgets to bear those costs than third parties.