[xt00]

If the companies that are holding land are able to maintain steady profits with minimal competition, then the logical approach is to say we should incentivize them to build on the land, make improvements etc now to ideally decrease the value of the existing land to make it more affordable to people. So could you essentially say "if you own more than 20 properties that are not owner occupied, you have to pay a tax.. but if you sell the house, you get some large chunk of the tax money back".. something that should encourage the big builders to build something and to sell it -- not to build and potentially rent it out -- which is in many cases the most expensive type of house to rent.

[JackYoustra]

Changing financing doesn't actually change underlying affordability. If your distinction is "rent vs own" and you ban doing it primarily you're either going to have pretty miserable housing outcomes or essentially shadow mortgages.

As well as push things to subletting or force people to stay in one place for most of their life.