> If someone is rich enough to rent things to others, by definition, they have more than they need. I don't know of many landlords who will continue to own pro

> If someone is rich enough to rent things to others, by definition, they have more than they need. I don't know of many landlords who will continue to own property if the rent does not pay their expenses and a reasonable profit. Profit is not bad, it is the reward society gives individuals for taking risks. Rental prices start from basic supply and demand. People who need a place to live will pay what they can afford, often unwisely paying more than they would need to if they were content with less. Landlords adjust prices accordingly - up if there is more demand, down if there is less. Add in the emotional component of "owning my own place", which drives up the price of single family properties and forces landlords to raise prices if they will cover costs and profit. Add in the property value increase caused by tax benefits the government has, in my opinion, unwisely handed out to homeowners. Push up prices more due to large minimum lot sizes and NIMBYism constraining supply in desirable areas. (After all, what makes an area desirable? From an economic standpoint, the ability to easily exchange labor for money or some other store of value.) The result? Society largely is responsible for its own dilemmas.