Housing Populism Under Financialized Capitalism

This paper examines the rise of housing populism: narratives casting financial investors as predatory and policies demanding investor bans. We argue that housing populism is politically appealing less because it reflects economic realities than because it resonates with public moral commitments: distrust of financialized capitalism and support for housing as a collective entitlement. Drawing on two decades of property-level transaction data, we demonstrate that institutional investors account for a very small share of housing transactions and have limited effects on housing costs. Original surveys reveal, however, that voters overestimate investor activity, believe that investors undermine the right to housing, and demand that the government safeguards access. Experimental evidence shows that politicians advocating investor bans via rights-based or anti-predatory frames substantially outperform those prioritizing home-building through pragmatic or market-oriented appeals. Housing populism channels social-rights claims into symbolic confrontations between ``the people'' and financial elites, often displacing more effective policy responses.