Why don’t they issue a loan then, and get paid back with interest? It’s insane that our system, by design, has an underclass that is earning WAY less because they can’t afford the entry price for a home, so all their rent for years and years goes into someone else’s pocket instead of their own equity. IMO

For the same reason the banks won’t lend to the same people. Sure, some renters can qualify for a home loan and choose not to, but not all can.

And it’s much much much easier to eventually evict someone and lose thousands than to try to get loaned money back from someone who is judgement proof, losing hundreds of thousands.

I’m assuming you’re also not in the business of having long fundamental disagreements on days old posts so I won’t try to convince you, but just so you can see my perspective: I think you’re focusing too much on the microeconomic dynamics in your defense of the system, when we want a macroeconomic overhaul. In other words, at some level socializing that risk to solve this huge inequity.

I think you’d agree that we could fund a national/regional/global system that would provide a sufficient safety net for a system where everyone is paying into some kind of equity for their land. You just don’t agree that it’s worth it / sets the right incentives / a bunch of other reasons I could never think of that I’m sure are sound. But I hope you see why taking the “but everything’s on fire!!!!” macro perspective is appealing in theory :)

Yes, but that's what banks and mortgages are for already.

If that is the only function, why don’t renters buy instead of renting?