"Encouraging" home ownership is a fool's errand when applied to generations accustomed to being provided everything because they are "entitled" to it.
Isn't insanity doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results?
The root problem is attitude. The triumph of "rights" over obligations; the abandonment of the simple concept that if you don't work, you starve.
The "for the chil'run" crowd is the eternal scam. If a family is totally on welfare, all but one of the adults must work, or the state feeds the children --- away from "home" --- where the adults can't help themselves to the food. Strange, that we should worry about the children starving, but the "parents" are not obligated to...
A similar story can be told about San Francisco, California. A well-known developer erected two identical high-rise residential buildings. On in Hunter's Point, a sad part of San Francisco, where it would encourage "upgrading" of the neighborhood. The other on Green Street, in a tony neighborhood near Nob Hill.
Predictably, no normal persons would buy the units in Hunter's point (who wants to live in a mugger's paradise?). It then was used as "subdidized housing", aka a vertical ghetto. No expectations were put in place, only "rights". Drugs, mayhem and vandalism were rampant.
The building was demolished less than 20 years later.
Meantime, the identical Green Street units are all worth in excess of $1 million.
It's not rocket science.
Same thing happens here in Philly. Every 20 years, housing projects are demolished and new ones built. Why? because they deteriorate into criminal and social leech Utopias. Then the Democratic mayor steps in and uses public money to tear them down and build brand-new pretty housing units, thinking that it's the apartments themselves that are the problems.
We can build these people skyrise penthouses for chrissake! It still doesn't change who they are and what their principles are!
It's a fraud. It might work for a while but they're just buying time.