Something I've been yelling from the rooftops.

Housing can either be affordable, or it can be an investment that's bought, rented, and sold for the sole purpose of profit. It's not possible for it to be both.

People expect their house to appreciate faster than inflation, but all that does is rob the next generation of home ownership.

This kind of assumes the only reason a house appreciates in value is because people are "treating it as an asset" rather than "the house I bought 30 years ago in the middle of nowhere is now smack dab in the middle of a very desirable area." At that point it's simple supply and demand, not some homeowner being greedy.

> The higher the value goes, the higher the taxes go. You raise the rent and your land value taxes go up because it's more valuable

This makes the fatal assumption that just because a house is worth dramatically more than what you paid for it many years ago that your income must have risen just as dramatically. "Oh well, too bad, sell your house and deal with it." Maybe people kind of like living where they've put down roots and don't want to be punished for something outside of their control? Any proposal that boils down to "pay more or fuck off" is not going to go over very well.