Well, ownership only works if/when people believe in it, so I think it can be argued that isn’t very practical. And with community generally having broken down over the 20th century, privacy and autonomy are being attacked more than ever. People are sold the promises and superficial appearances of both privacy and autonomy, while those who have separated us for the exploitation of our labor, our capital are openly hostile to those notions. The reason why corporations now practically own people is that they are themselves organized collectives, if only of an anti-social variety.
Then they might find themselves needing to justify how land and housing are used - why their vague feelings of entitlement are more important than how much shelter there is, or who can access it. Even if people are somehow entitled to all live on their own little islands, what good does that do if there simply isn’t enough room? Do others die of exposure so that they can still feel “dignified”?
I think it does. It is like the old kid’s game of musical chairs. Get people to work harder to compete and get into the “winner’s circle”, because this perpetuates the current exploitive structure of society. More than enough money is spent (wasted) by governments which would allow for every single person to be housed comfortably already. But it isn’t, because that is not one of their priorities. Instead, they prioritize creating employment and commerce, with the expectation that these will somehow “just happen” to satisfy people’s immediate needs. No municipality that I know of actually prioritizes the securing of food, clothing, and shelter for its citizens - despite the obvious necessity of these things.
“The Homeless” are simply those who are, for various reasons, unable or unwilling to play their game.
