Zoning doesnt matter unfortunately, prices go up in line with maximum possible mortgage amounts.

Real-estate prices have no bearing on 'value' of the land or materials. The buyer is convinced that he will get that money back and then some from the next sucker to buy it off him. It a pyramid scheme, detached from real economy.

In this particular economy, absolutely - where else is your money going to go?

However, part of the way we got here is specifically due to neighborhood segregation and zoning laws. People don't like their housing going down in value, so they protest anything that might cause it to do so. Whether or not upzoning would actually harm property values is not material: the fact that people believe it to do so is enough to get them to protest increases in the housing supply. This means that every local government is blocking housing supply and working to keep prices high, which makes housing an artificially safe investment, and thus encourages infinite speculation.

This will continue until we break the idea that home ownership = retirement plan and that dense housing = cheap housing = crime. Once that happens, then it makes far less sense to speculate on real estate and we can start unwinding this long con. The reason why maximum mortgage amounts are so high is that banks can't lose - if the the debtor pays off their investment in full, then the bank wins; and if they default, then the bank repossesses a house that is likely worth more than the principal of the loan, so they win. There's no default risk - if that were to return, then banks would be more skeptical of who they lend to, and that would put start quenching demand.

You’re describing monetization, not a pyramid scheme.

infinitely rising house prices are impossible, so a housing market where everyone expects them to do that is a pyramid scheme, someone will be left holding the bag

And how much of your paycheck to landlords goes to the bank to pay off the mortgage

Well they bought the place in 2005 for about 1/3 of what the current Redfin estimate is, so probably very little?

And even if that were not the case, with real estate climbing 8% or more per year, they are still in line for a huge payday if / when they choose to sell.

Well that depends - if the real estate market holds and they pay for all the appropriate upkeeps. What about the situation where real estate properties go down and it's difficult to find renters or pay for upkeep on the property. Also - rental real estate doesn't rise in the same way the single family homes do.

The landlord is the scourge narrative bugs me. There are for sure a bunch of terrible land lords especially the huge soulless companies but there are a lot of little family operations that don't try and gouge their tenants.

Not sure what the point you're attempting to make with those hypotheticals is? What if winning the lottery came with a bunch of pitfalls?

I don't begrudging the ppl who bought houses for their good fortune. I resent when those people block new development in the name of maintaining "historical character" or whatever other invented excuse to keep their own property values high.

But except for the interest that is still money going to the landlord as they have the property itself.

Interest, capital expenditures, maintenance, insurance, potential lawsuits (hopefully not), time spent managing the properties. Don't disagree with you - it pays off the principal also goes towards other things. For some people not owning, having to take care of a property or put significant amounts of capital into a property is an asset. Not everyone for sure, but some people. For example myself until my late 30s was a happy renter - would I prefer the money going elsewhere? Yes. Would I have been able to afford the same lifestyle in the city? Absolutely not.