As for the substantive issue, I have the same issue with anti-rent control arguments that I have with anti-union arguments, namely that they tend to be advanced by people whose ideologies don't lend themselves to seeing affordable housing as a moral imperative at all. Unlike with unions, though, I'm not emotionally wedded to the idea of rent control and would be happy to reconsider or even abandon my support for it if a clear, non-vague, politically actionable (i.e. not "just abolish zoning regulations and development firms will throw up tons of cheap housing on their own!") alternative were articulated to me.
I mean, there's rent control and there's rent control isn't there? There is a huge plethora of policies that could and can be described as rent control and not all of them have the same outcomes on the housing market. One of the problems is that blanket criticism of all rent control is often advanced by people who believe that the solution is a complete liberalisation of the housing market. And that is also a road to complete and utter disaster where it has been tried.
(I mean, the most obvious, succesful policy is widespread social housing - but the government owning things isn't so popular these days...)
On a slightly separate note, I have read that housing - for ownership at least - in the UK has not really become less affordable (or more unaffordable) in the past few decades. Although prices have risen above inflation/wages, what matters is not the lump cost, but, clearly, monthly mortgage outgoings. These, apparently, are relatively no higher in general than before, because mortgages have become significantly cheaper as a result of low interest rates, and a price war in the high-street lending sector. Also, the reason many cannot afford deposits is because of a regulation introduced in the aftermath of the crash forcing lenders to 'stress test' people's income; it is only after this increase that many cannot afford the deposit. (Obviously whether that regulation is desirable is a different question.)
Perhaps those more knowledgeable could evaluate this claim.
Even if more affordable, the problem is accessibility. The decoupling of house prices and wages has made home ownership increasingly inaccessible when you can only borrow 'x' multiple of your income. That has the double impact of not only exclusing the young/low income owners from the property market, but also means leaves renters - ie those on lower incomes - with higher housing costs and ultimately exacerbates the redistribution of wealth from the have-nots to the haves.
