I agree with all of that, at least the first part. If you expanded your quote a little bit more, I thought I said as much.
My point was simply that stating that renting is the equivalent to taking on unsecured debt, which seems to be expressing the sentiment that it's always throwing money away, is ridiculous. I'm not claiming anything more than that. You seem to be implying I'm claiming something about one being better than the other overall, and I'm not. Apologies if I'm misinterpreting you, but you seem to be trying to correct me ("Here's the thing . . . ") but I don't see where you disagree with me.
As to the second part, I don't think it would be a crap shoot. Much of the advantages we give buyers in the market only apply to your primary residence. (Such as the exemption from capital gains.) We artificially skew the market towards individual home ownership. It's not just a matter of price correction. If we took them away, it would make a lot less sense for individuals to own. The corrected market would have a lot more investment properties.