1.8M/year (55+ cohort) is potentially not fast enough to bring about housing policy change in a timely manner from this alone. Non market housing is also a necessary component besides YIMBY. Housing locked up from market forces is housing that can remain affordable.
housing _is_, unfortunately, considered an investment for many people that cannot make relatively-significant money otherwise. (note: i am also against the housing-as-an-investment school of thought.)
Expansion of housing vouchers at the US federal level would significantly address the needs of those who can’t afford market rate housing. Vouchers are more flexible, time-limited, and face less political opposition than local subsidized housing options.
In addition to others point out the timing issue, in many cases you'd end up buying a home that has been lived in for 40 years and is likely well due for expensive updates. Sure its a house and that's not nothing, but it may not really help with the "affordable" part that's missing today.
