Blackrock bought the 3 houses because they believe they will make money on them. If that's true, then even if you remove Blackrock, then someone will fight to b

Blackrock bought the 3 houses because they believe they will make money on them. If that's true, then even if you remove Blackrock, then someone will fight to buy the house because of the positive return on investment. Any solution requires that buying an existing house is no longer directly profitable. However, as originally posted, that goes against the goal of having houses increase in value, a goal which too many voters share. Put simply, to make houses affordable, you have to drop (or stabilize) prices. If prices are now stable, then your Blackrock problem just goes away. There are a few ideas that preference individuals over Blackrock (rules about how many houses you can own, tax rules that preference primary residences, etc...). Some of these can help, but still, if prices keep going up, then new residents won't be able to buy, and you still have the same disaster. EDIT: I am partial to a ludicrous capital gains tax on property (like 70%). However, it's possible that will harm liquidity, so who knows!