>Pretty much every state has zoning laws because among other things, people in suburbs don't want huge apartment complexes popping up next to them.
Do you not get that it's all relative? If California was building enough homes for its population growth and now it isn't--that certainly impacts prices. This is why Japan has cheap homes--even though they have tough zoning laws. It's all a game of manipulation.
Yes, other states have zoning laws, but they don't cripple new housing development. California has absurd laws that allow neighbors to challenge homes being built on empty lots or about the design choices of someone else's home. You claim to be for freedom in another comment then defend this? Which is it? Do you want an open market or not? Or are you just for what benefits you? That's fine, but be honest about it.
> not everyone has to live in the same city, and there's always more land to build on
This is the stupid and selfish talking again. This is why the Bay Area has workers living in Gilroy and Livermore commuting to SF and San Jose. This isn't good for anyone. San Francisco doesn't have to stay 2 stories tall... that's all a charade to prevent housing supply increasing.
>But plenty (most? idk) of those who left the area still stayed elsewhere in CA.
I actually don't disagree with this, but curious if you can cite anything because I had workers move to Florida, Montana, Colorado, Washington, Philadelphia, Boston, NYC, Utah... and none of them ever returned. I do think a lot stayed in California--I for one moved from SF to Burlingame and then to Sacramento then to San Diego. I do think there would be some interesting migration patterns to track.