> (2) make housing an unattractive financial asset I think about it a lot, and I'm not sure this is the problem, more like a symptom of something else. Buildi

> (2) make housing an unattractive financial asset I think about it a lot, and I'm not sure this is the problem, more like a symptom of something else. Building a house is a capex exercise. Someone needs to provide the capital to get the house built. This can be someone who has outright cash, or a stable salary to get a mortgage (rent the capital for a fee) or an investor with their own capital, looking to charge rent. What happens if you make the last category unattractive? Well a few things, possibly: - Ideally, home builders would start charging less money for new houses, as the supply of buyers has dropped. The highest bidder has less money so prices will drop. - But presumably, also less homebuilders would stay in this business. Inasmuch as they do build new homes, it is because the market price is attractive. Some will stay, but some will be pushed out. This in turn will drop supply of housing. My fear would be that the net result would be prices staying where they are, supply of housing dropping, and the renters being pushed out. If anything, what we need is just more houses, built by someone, anyone.