The problem is greed not owning a house you don't live in.

I can go to my country's capital, point to a window and guess, with a fair degree of confidence, that, if rented, the property has an exploitative rent value. And next I can guess if the property is privately owned or is property of a company.

My grandparents, like many people of their generation, owned their house and another flat in the same building, which they rented for decades to the same family. The rent was updated, yearly, and in accordance to legal impositions. It allowed for my parents to slightly supplement their meager retirement and the other couple to live in decent conditions until they both passed away.

In the exact same building, another person bought an empty flat, renovated it and put it up for rent by nearly six times the value my grandparents charged, needlessly. Needlessly to say, the house had a very high turn rate, with the average tennant being there less than one year. And often leaving the property less than well maintained.

The problem is taxation. Who owns has to be adequately taxed by their income and property. That money needs to be syphoned back into social services, like healthcare, public transportation, education and, yes, even public housing. It must not be allowed to pile and be used to amass assets to further enrich those who already have more than enough.

There will always be people who are uninterested in owning. Like students away from home, people and professionals that move constantly or tjose who can't be bothered by having to deal with property taxes and other expenses related to owning and maintaning a house. And those houses have to be maintained by someone. The state is not and should not be expected to maintain all that property because that property is a source of income for the state itself. What the state should and must do is curb the unchecked amassing of wealth.