Why? What value do they provide, other than having a bunch of money upfront? I’d argue there are many, many ways to fund building construction other than for-profit ownership
Providing capital is useful! You can't just ignore that.
And it’s much much much easier to eventually evict someone and lose thousands than to try to get loaned money back from someone who is judgement proof, losing hundreds of thousands.
I think you’d agree that we could fund a national/regional/global system that would provide a sufficient safety net for a system where everyone is paying into some kind of equity for their land. You just don’t agree that it’s worth it / sets the right incentives / a bunch of other reasons I could never think of that I’m sure are sound. But I hope you see why taking the “but everything’s on fire!!!!” macro perspective is appealing in theory :)