> there should be penalties for buying houses to rent or for investment purposes outside of ones primary residence. There are lots of people who don't want to

> there should be penalties for buying houses to rent or for investment purposes outside of ones primary residence. There are lots of people who don't want to own a home (e.g. who value the mobility/flexibility of renting), and people who are unable to afford the fully loaded homeownership costs. In these rent-vs-mortgage discussions people often overlook the non-mortgage homeownership costs which can be very significant and hard to predict. I say this as a person who found myself needing an unexpected $25k+ roof replacement in my first year of homeownership. I suspect living standards for the bottom quintile would actually fall if they had to maintain their own homes. E.g. how are the people who can't put together $400 in an emergency, the minimum wage employees living hand to mouth, etc going to be able to afford to replace an unexpected leaking roof (a $10k+ problem) or a broken water heater (a $5k problem) or refrigerator (a $500+ problem)? A lot of basic amenities are legally mandated for landlords to provide that I think low-income tenants would not be able to maintain on their own. A landlord with a larger net worth is better able to absorb these cashflow problems and keep the property in a healthy state.