[conanbatt]

> Because building isn't the core problem. It is that a large part of the population have a large part of the life savings in the housing market and therefor would take a loss if housing became affordable. It is like asking why the government can't make stocks fall.

Boo-hoo. Poor rich people.

[ImprovedSilence]

It's not necessarily rich people. Imagine spending waaay too much of your income on your house, not a huge house by any stretch of the imagination, something seen as average to small in the rest of the country. You bought the house because it was where family/you job/your life is. So a large part of your net worth is tied up in this house, for better or worse. You sure as hell don't want housing prices to go down, you'd loose your shirt, wouldn't be able to retire, etc etc. It's not all rich people with big houses wanting to keep the status quo, it's all the middle class that already bought in that would be financially devastated if housing dropped, good luck trying to get them to change the nimby mindset, they've been paying for (or you can see it as investing in) their desired lifestyle, and they are not about to give it up.

[conanbatt]

> magine spending waaay too much of your income on your house, not a huge house by any stretch of the imagination, something seen as average to small in the rest of the country.

Then sell it and stop being that person. There's no obstacle. The interests of the landlords financial situation requires no extra care, let alone at the expense of tax payers or citizens at large.

Everyone person that buys a house is responsible for that decision, and punishing renters to protect them is straight up poor payers for the rich.

[chrisdhoover]

Thank you, the grandparent comment isn’t helpful and shows a lack of understanding.