If a bunch of people with 10-100x your income kept moving into your city, driving property prices into the stratosphere, you'd be pissed too. It doesn't stop with houses either. All of the middle class stores start getting replaced with higher cost ones that cater to the ultra-wealthy, leaving you to drive further out for good deals.
Resident who don't want to be pushed out have their own breaking point to, and instead of voting with their feet, they vote to evict the invaders.
California isn't the only place where this a problem. All across the world we are seeing pushback against ultra-wealthy taking over cities/neighborhoods and driving out middle class residents.
Most of the residents you are talking about were "invaders" one time too. The difference is that when they showed up, more housing was built for them.
Today, more housing does not get built, primarily because of strict zoning laws supported by the existing residents, so newcomers end up competing with existing residents for housing.
On the other hand, if new housing was built for the newcomers, they would contribute to the economy of the city and pay taxes, and their presence would be an overall net positive.
Something is really wrong with the way a city is run if an influx of high earners is considered a bad thing.
Driving up prices such that a minority population can afford it is a solution to overcrowding -- not a cause of it. In fact, its the natural market solution to overcrowding: demand exceeding supply..
And yet, the problem isn't fixed, even after 20+ years of this "natural market solution".
Turns out, these people have to live somewhere, so now they travel from further out by car, causing a bunch of traffic congestion. They had to move, but the jobs are still in the same place.
If you have 20,000 people in the city, and 200,000 people outside
and you kick out the 20,000 people in the city, to another state
so 20,000 suburbans move into the city
now you have 20,000 people in the city, and 180,000 people outside
I'm not sure what you've solved. It feels like you're arguing this is a knee-jerk reaction, and a fair reaction, and that this is a solution, but you keep avoiding saying how it actually solves anything regarding overcrowding. Like it solves every problem except the one under discussion.
There has not been a "natural market solution" for housing for two reasons: strict zoning laws, and rent control. Both of those together have caused the housing shortage.
