I don't think I can follow your logic here. The private sector isn't building houses, and the government isn't building houses. No one is building houses. How can you use this to conclude that only the government building houses can work?
Presumably there are compelling economic reasons why private builders aren't building enough, but I don't see why the government is not subject to those same reasons.
Worrying about affordability when there's a chronic shortage is focusing on a symptom rather than on the problem itself. They're only unaffordable because there aren't enough. Whenever there isn't enough of something, money decides who gets it and who goes without. That might seem unfair and that's a whole discussion on it's own but the bottom line is that there isn't a fair solution as long as there are more families than homes.
I don't think I can follow your logic here. The private sector isn't building houses, and the government isn't building houses. No one is building houses. How can you use this to conclude that only the government building houses can work?
Presumably there are compelling economic reasons why private builders aren't building enough, but I don't see why the government is not subject to those same reasons.
Worrying about affordability when there's a chronic shortage is focusing on a symptom rather than on the problem itself. They're only unaffordable because there aren't enough. Whenever there isn't enough of something, money decides who gets it and who goes without. That might seem unfair and that's a whole discussion on it's own but the bottom line is that there isn't a fair solution as long as there are more families than homes.