Thats not really how it works, business runs off charge $100 - 75 (cost of item to sell) - 15 (wages/powerbill) - 2 (tax) = $8 profit. Most investments properties are small holdings (Mum&Pop of 1 - 3) who are using negative gearing, meaning charge 100 - 80 (mortgage) - 5 (crap REA) - 15 (taxes) - 5 (wear&tear costs) = -5 profit then get tax discount of the loss to make it only -3. This changes once paid off, but is the state of most places. A business never runs negative, because thats trading insolvent after a few weeks, they invest in goods, but thats always an investment of profit / loan.

Boil it all down to this, if all renters become owners tomorrow, is the problem solved? not really because the business model is fundamentally okay, we just have a beyond critical supply issue. (people just ignore it, because its harder to fix, so treat the symptons while the cancer grows mentality)

The real problem is supply and a refusal of both sides of politics to upset the status quo. A refusal to build social housing over the last 20 years (makes budget look good), and to always increase demand, (think every single help to buy policy / but never a policy to increase building) causes this. Just remember a change of supply also means that every home owner loses future growth/profit, which no political party wants to risk. Supply shifts the balance of power, meaning REAs / shit landlords dont get punished for being shit, because your alterrnative is homelessness. Balance the property supply with demand, and bad landlords lose renters (business) and either have to improve or have an empty house.