This is an egregious misreading of the parent comment.
Someone in a position of economic vulnerability isn't going to invest in housing to rent out if there is a non-insignificant chance of damage to the property.
Moreover, this uncertainty has the perverse outcome of pushing the potential small landlord to use his funds to invest in something like a real estate investment fund - which will result in less local control over housing.
Are these 150K being used to build a new house or to buy an existing house?
I think it’s time the English speaking world realised that landlords are not providing a service, they are extracting a tax on people that don’t have 150K to pay a deposit.
The down payment would only be 10% of that. Existing or new house would be same, houses that are bought for rent are only available through mortgages which are a pain.
When I was younger I would really like to have more houses to rent... I don't really care if they provide a service or not, it's the cheapest and more liberating option available.
If the neighbors are a hell... I could just move out. Or if the house was not close to a gym I liked... move out.
Someone in a position of economic vulnerability isn't going to invest in housing to rent out if there is a non-insignificant chance of damage to the property.
Moreover, this uncertainty has the perverse outcome of pushing the potential small landlord to use his funds to invest in something like a real estate investment fund - which will result in less local control over housing.