then the argument becomes, "the landlord created value by putting a house on the land and maintaining it" well the government can say the same thing about roads and other services. then the argument becomes well two parties agreed to this via contract the government takes your wages regardless. this is also false the government takes your wages under threat of prison and the landlord does it via threat of homelessness. they did not create the land and any many countries and places it was most likely stolen from someone yet they use armed men and the government to defend their claim to it refusing to pay rent or taxes both result in harm to the individual just in different ways, sharecropping was also done under contract in many cases but it was grossely immoral and basically theft as well. then the argument becomes property rights but if one person has the right to buy up all of the properties in a neighborhood and use nimby laws, single family zoning, multiple dwelling laws, etc to keep people from owning then they are excluding other people the same property rights that they themselves enjoy.
Norway