Allowing ownership of houses as an investment is just wrong. (The usual response to this is that you need investors or housing won't be built. The idea no-one would pay for a house to be built is silly, but we also have not-for profit housing associations.)

(And it’s of note that dealing with renting a SFH is possibly a worse experience than renting from a complex. Large enough complexes have maintenance staff and professional management. Someone renting a SFH might well have just that unit to rent - amateur hour. Or they could be a corporation but because you’re just one unit in probably a more spread out population of properties the renter might well experience lowered services from the property management.)

I do agree the investment activity we’ve seen in simply hoarding up SFH properties for investment is deeply problematic. There are all sorts of ways to push the market back towards owner occupiers.

It’d also be nice if it was a standard thing for working people to be able to make it to public local government meetings. Those tend to be timed when working people are at work. That could help something’s, but there’s probably still be a lot of NIMBYism…

It's harder for both to purchase, but investors are also heavily leveraged and fighting investment alternatives in a higher-rate environment.

Because high interest rates can reduce demand, in a vacuum you would also see a reduction in the price of the property, making them more affordable. Of course this price is also impacted by countless other things, builder velocity being one of them, so in the real world it takes time to sort out.

The 70s, 80s, 90s had relatively stable home ownership rates despite very high interest rates. In 2016 the US reached a bottom in home ownership at 62.9 despite historically low rates.

BTW I was not referring to rich people living in their homes that they got with high interest rates, the comment was specifically towards investment property. Definitely agree that hoarding properties is out of hand.

Rent-seeking is an activity where the perpetrator creates legal barriers that result in them collecting money without providing anything of value.

Many people hate on landlords, but unless they’re also actively restricting new supply, they’re not rent-seeking as the term is defined.

But I agree with your point.

- prevent corporations from owning residential property

- tax property rental income at a substantially higher rate than income and exempt it from other deductions

- tax residential property which is empty for more than de minimis periods at an eye-watering rate (perhaps 5-6x standard property taxes).

None of this requires higher interest rates, but it will result in a transfer of wealth away from aging boomers and corporations, which apparently must be avoided at all costs.