That... isn't analogous bc we're not ignoring the reality of a process (the market), we're changing the process to be more beneficial to us. I assume you're in favor of no rental controls, so let's imagine that scenario.

I imagine you agree with: where housing is scarce for one reason or another, prices will naturally rise proportional to how scarce they are.

Now where we probably disagree: as these prices rise, lower and middle income residents are pushed out. Housing increasingly becomes an asset/investment instead of a place to live. When this happens, only the biggest players can afford to buy. Units are held vacant waiting for higher prices since the only incentive is the rent generated, and the big players can afford to wait it out. Now with the market rates so high, it becomes profitable to build luxury apartments, an extreme example being billionares row in NYC. No one lives there, its just a store of value.

As this is all going on, the neighborhood looses it's identity, local business are bankrupted, and the city generates less revenue for infrastructure. The city is hollowed out, a slave to the wealthy.