Basically if it's cheaper for a renter to live in a place than for an owner to live there, then the owner must be coming up with the difference, thereby subsidizing the renter.
That is the basic condition that makes renting more attractive: can I rent a place for lower total monthly payments than buying a similar place in the same area.
That owner who doesn't live in the rented unit has to live somewhere else, and faces living costs there, on top of subsidizing the renter.
That situation can hardly persist for long; landlords may be willing to take it on the chin for a while (e.g. to get into the rental business), but not over the long term.
The rent will have to go up eventually to close the gap, or else the landlord will kick out the tenant and move in to save money. Or even sell the place (whereby the new owners may kick out the tenant).
That is the basic condition that makes renting more attractive: can I rent a place for lower total monthly payments than buying a similar place in the same area.
That owner who doesn't live in the rented unit has to live somewhere else, and faces living costs there, on top of subsidizing the renter.
That situation can hardly persist for long; landlords may be willing to take it on the chin for a while (e.g. to get into the rental business), but not over the long term.
The rent will have to go up eventually to close the gap, or else the landlord will kick out the tenant and move in to save money. Or even sell the place (whereby the new owners may kick out the tenant).