Given this, any "solution" to housing affordability is "solving" a problem that a sizable and highly influential segment of the population doesn't want solved. On the contrary, you see real government action whenever home prices fall.
In the US, our shortsightedness has begun threatening the lower-middle class. People with some cash in the bank are facing homelessness, due to a historic lack of housing. The housing shortage came following dozens of contributors including NIMBY, AirBnB, single-use zoning, tunnel-vision'd pols/voters, corp house buyers, etc. Pointing to a single factor delays solutions.
The mechanism they all use for that is restrictive zoning. To win that you have to defeat them all. That's why it's hard to do.
Having failed to actually solve the problem, some people have had the idea to foist it onto someone else. Restrict who you can rent to, so people can't buy a property and use it for vacation rentals, on the theory that it will shift supply to long-term rentals. Then that makes the problem worse for short-term rentals, creating an incentive for regulatory arbitrage by AirBNB. Then long-term renters condemn AirBNB for thwarting their attempt to shift costs onto people who can't vote in the jurisdiction with the zoning problem.
All of that is bike shedding and friendly fire. The only real solution is to increase the housing supply.
That would be why I made the point repeatedly that it isn't any one factor that got us here and cautioned against trying to frame it that way.
If housing prices are too high, landlords will want them to stay high. You can say that it's male landlords and female landlords and gay landlords and redneck landlords and atheist landlords and thin landlords and fat landlords and look how many factors there are. But you're just bisecting the group "existing property owners" along arbitrary lines that have nothing to do with anything.
Get rid of the coercion and you get rid of the problems.