Construction costs are currently skyrocketing

And who knows how much easier it will still be in five years to get a single-family house plot

Tagesschau reports: "From the perspective of Federal Construction Minister Klara Geywitz, the construction of new single-family houses in Germany must be curtailed to reduce land consumption and protect the environment. It is 'economically and ecologically nonsensical' if every generation builds new single-family houses." -> I agree with that. More pressure on people who leave houses empty, stronger promotion of renovations (possibly also demolition and new construction of multi-family houses) instead of developing areas on greenfield sites, i.e. densification. Possibly also more pressure on retired couples living in 200m² palaces where they only use 1/3 of the space to find a penthouse and sell.

Tagesschau reports: "From the perspective of Federal Minister of Construction Klara Geywitz, the new construction of single-family homes in Germany must be curtailed in order to reduce land consumption and protect the environment. It is 'economically and ecologically nonsensical' if every generation builds new single-family homes." -> I agree with that. More pressure on people who leave houses vacant, stronger promotion of renovation (possibly also demolition and new multi-family housing construction) instead of developing new areas on greenfields, i.e. densification. Possibly also more pressure on retired couples living in 200m² palaces, where they only use 1/3 of the space, to find themselves a penthouse and sell.

I fully agree with you on vacancy, but vehemently disagree on the latter. Owner-occupied residential property must be preserved for the duration of the owner’s lifetime. Whether it’s an 80sqm apartment or a 300sqm house. Anything else would be totalitarian socialism. In my opinion, the governing coalition will soon turn enough dials so that the issue of single-family homes will be limited to a small single-digit percentage of this population anyway. The global situation is currently reinforcing this, even without the coalition having to get their hands dirty. So I only somewhat understand Geywitz’s initiative at present. I hope my comment does not ignite a fundamental political debate. It merely reflects my current feelings about the situation.

Possibly more pressure on retired couples living in 200m² palaces, in which they only use 1/3 of the space, to look for a penthouse

The houses are paid off and the emotional home of the residents. What kind of pressure do you want to exert to move into a small and expensive penthouse without a garden?

In my opinion, the traffic light coalition will soon be turning enough screws so that the topic of single-family houses will anyway be limited to a small single-digit percentage of this population.

Small single-digit percentage - that's hysteria.

Not bad… some people work their whole lives for something, often through sacrifice, deprivation, and whatnot, and then the grandchild generation comes along and wants to put pressure on others to make room for them. So, regardless of the fact that I believe many of the older generations would do themselves a favor by it, I first believe that this is not the problem, second that it is more than impudent, and third that there are far better approaches.

I understand that in a house-building forum, the acquisition/construction of a single-family house feels like a basic right, but it certainly is not a right to displace those who own and live in it.

Maybe one should also remember again that a single-family house represents a kind of luxury in every generation. No matter how one came to it. It never was and never will be that everyone can afford it.

Small single-digit percentage - that's just hysteria.

I am talking about the number of private new builds in the single-family house sector in relation to the entire residential construction activity when "all obstacles are in place." Do you really consider that hysteria? I simply see it as the result of various influencing factors.