Please read the above definitions (and feel free to look it up for yourself). If a person or group of people are given a subsidy that enables them to pay less than market taxes, then they are being subsidized by other taxpayers, and/or other service providers, and/or consumers of those public services.
Money doesn’t grow on trees, and when some people are specifically excluded from paying the same tax rates/amounts that others are paying, then they are being subsidized.
Yes, renters *can* be more engaged, but study after study shows that ownership is what enables most lower/middle-class families to gain wealth, and it also shows that neighborhoods where most people own tend to be cleaner, safer, and nicer than neighborhoods in which people rent.
Of course, correlation isn’t causation, and I do understand that traditional mortgage standards excluded those who would be less desirable neighbors (irresponsible, broke, don’t pay bills, BKs, etc.), so the comparison between renting/owning neighborhoods isn’t exactly fair because it’s not the act of owning that makes a person a (generally) better neighbor, but the fact that they’ve shown the responsibility and capability to pay off a mortgage over time.
