[2THFairy]

> Somehow the homeowners almost always win against the renters in this political tug-of-war.

Demographics. Homeowners skew old, which gives them a bunch of advantages in enacting their political power. Higher turnout, baby boom giving them numerical superiority, and the time advantage of being able to enact policy decades ago.

In the US, this is supplemented by matters of race, where because of past redlining policies, "pro-homeowner" policy (esp. suburban single-family-homes) in the last half-century has been a way to primarily benefit white people.

[potato3732842]

You're forgetting the most important one. Having a bunch of your money tied up in an illiquid asset that is subject to all manner of government micromanagement gives you a huge incentive to see to it that the government doesn't get progressively more shitty toward you than it already is.

[Spivak]

Yep, saying it's an age thing is missing that every homeowner is directly financially incentivized to ensure prices go up. I literally get physical printed mail (against my will) every other week telling me about the health of my neighborhood where higher home sale prices means better. Being older makes a person more likely to be homeowner, they got the causation backwards.

[2THFairy]

> Being older makes a person more likely to be homeowner, they got the causation backwards.

No.

Being a homeowner doesn't grant one political influence. Being old grants one political influence.

It's the correlation of age and homeownership that means homeowners have the political influence the push through policy that drives up real estate prices.

Non-homeowners have political incentives all the same. If only just to oppose those very homeowners' policies. What they lack is the political influence to make it happen.