there are a lot of people who need shelter who have not accumulated the wealth needed to purchase a dwelling in the economic framework of today. how will those people be housed? mass public housing (aka the government is an exception to this rule)? who is owning/maintaining/orchestrating that housing operation? and when people can buy, who are they buying from, once everyone has met this rule?

it's a far more complicated problem than "landlord bad". Renting is a valuable option for expensive necessities that often times aren't as useful permanently owned (cars, ski gear, houses).

the problem is that incentives are terribly non-aligned, given majority of people need to rely on renting.

here are some of my ideas (as a long-time renter who owns a co-op unit since the pandemic)

- make "projected housing capacity growth rate guarantee" for every residential-capable zone a policy — every <N> years, evaluate each zone for meeting that growth rate, and slate lowest density housing in that zone for demolition with large bounties for developers to claim the permits to build denser (usually taller) housing than the existing densest housing within the zone. The densest zones of the city can extend N by some factor each time. (that's a rudimentary version of the idea)

- rent payments up to a certain amount per household member should be tax deductible commensurate to market rate in the region, so that home ownership doesn't immediately become tax optimal.

- property taxes should be tied to market rate rent and market rate home values in that region so that home owners are not incentivized to prop up inflated rental prices when they aren't actively renting out, or to inflate home valuations when they aren't actively in the market to sell.

- home ownership beyond primary residence should be taxed more significantly than it is.

- tax developers constructing and/or operating luxury housing at different tiers (factoring sq. footage/room, amenities, starting lease prices)