[galfarragem]

> Why have a max of two? Seems arbitrary, why not one?

Finding the sweet spot implies trial end error. It's certainly not 1 and I suspect 2 is too restrictive unnecessarily. The relevant is to restrain housing from being a financial instrument not to repress people. If a person can't buy a dozen houses the demand (and consequently the price) will fall.

[endisneigh]

1. You can’t be in two places simultaneously - there’s no reason to own more than one house per person.

2. If no one can own multiple houses, then rentals cannot exist. Where do those who cannot afford to buy live?