Paul Krugman writes that we need to stop conflating owing a home with citizenship.
"[H]ere's a question rarely asked, at least in Washington: Why should ever-increasing homeownership be a policy goal? How many people should own homes, anyway?
Listening to politicians, you'd think that every family should own its home - in fact, that you're not a real American unless you're a homeowner. 'If you own something,' Mr. Bush once declared, 'you have a vital stake in the future of our country.' Presumably, then, citizens who live in rented housing, and therefore lack that 'vital stake,' can't be properly patriotic. Bring back property qualifications for voting!
And the belief that you're nothing if you don't own a home is reflected in U.S. policy. Because the I.R.S. lets you deduct mortgage interest from your taxable income but doesn't let you deduct rent, the federal tax system provides an enormous subsidy to owner-occupied housing. On top of that, government-sponsored enterprises - Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac and the Federal Home Loan Banks - provide cheap financing for home buyers; investors who want to provide rental housing are on their own.
In effect, U.S. policy is based on the premise that everyone should be a homeowner. But here's the thing: There are some real disadvantages to homeownership. [L]et's try to open our minds to the possibility that those who choose to rent rather than buy can still share in the American dream - and still have a stake in the nation's future."