This map shows the extent of the Southern California apartment boom

> And because most of all this new construction is for luxury apartments, there’s very little that’s affordable to middle- and low-income workers.

I always hear this argument. Have there ever been many private-sector apartment complexes built specifically for low-income families? I'm under the impression "projects" were built by governments specifically because there was no private sector desire to build them. They would be low-profit, they tend to have higher defaults/eviction issues, and low income neighborhoods (especially with common areas) tend to fall into disrepair more than higher income areas. Low income renters tend to have to find older apartment complexes that have lost their luster.

The fallacy here is omitting the fact that as new high-end high-density housing is built, the pressure on older/existing housing goes down for those who can't afford to live in a new place.

Adding more housing supply in many different neighborhoods will help the nearby low-income neighborhoods by reducing the cost of rents.