I feel like the solution is simply non-market housing. Wether is government housing, or associative housing, non-market housing solve the "rent-controlled" issu

I feel like the solution is simply non-market housing. Wether is government housing, or associative housing, non-market housing solve the "rent-controlled" issue: new non-market housing are usually not that cheaper than regular rented housing and do not have any effect on the "new", but as time pass, the rent do not increase (it decrease even if it is associative housing, as the loans are reimbursed). In France, outside the Paris area (Paris is Paris), cities that had a huge "HLM" (non-market housing by the virtue of being regulated by the state) proportion in the 80s built on average more, more quickly. Now the proportion is on average under 10%, and the non-market housing have no more influence on the non-market housing in those places, but i wonder that if the proportion stayed between 20 and 40% non-market housing, even cities like La Rochelle, Nantes or Bordeaux (who are a pain to build around because of historical buildings and swampy surrounding) would be much cheaper. Also in france, non-market housing is like 85% "HLM" (which are also made cheaper because of low build quality), 5% anah (tax credit if you only rent at cost, only available on limited type of houses), which leave 10% for associative housing that is almost exclusively used for athletes and by emmaüs. Associative housing in other countries are not as skewed, and non-market housing is both less regulated and with way better service in Montreal, Vienna and probably other places i've not visited yet.