Construction costs are currently skyrocketing

Questionable within what timeframe the government intends to push something like this through - and whether this will affect areas already approved but not yet developed...

In 2020, around 16,000 single-family houses were built. Do you seriously believe that this number will shrink to 800? Statistically, there were 1.47 million millionaires in Germany in 2019. The number has increased significantly again in the last two years due to stock gains. Now there are also the heirs. Just because IT professionals in their early 30s with a part-time working wife and three children can no longer afford 200 sqm houses with double garages does not mean the end of the single-family house. I assume that in the future, more demolition will take place to create building space.

One should perhaps also once again keep in mind that a single-family house represents a kind of luxury in every generation.

True. I believe the question is not whether people who have money are allowed to indulge in luxury within the legal framework. The laws/rules/regulations are the problem. Thinking/laws in the past (i.e., 1945 to well into the 2010s): "We do whatever we feel like," climate, floods, drought, global food security, etc. do not interest us at all. The single-family house on the green meadow is a must-have, highly subsidized. Thinking/laws 2022+: "Oops, the planet is in self-destruction mode due to our decades-long mistakes / our destructively careless behavior. We should live and think differently. Apartment buildings with large shared gardens, unsealed allotments/gardens, passive houses... Now the question is: How do we make up for the mistakes through new 'rules'? Option 1: Only change everything that relates to the future, everything old/previous has "grandfathering protection." Option 2: Retrospectively correct mistakes and change things in all areas. One must see that the generation before us benefited greatly from low raw material prices (gasoline, gas, emitted endless CO2 into the air because they could and didn’t know better, etc.) and thus achieved too much prosperity. Those born after 1960 could partially choose from several companies that offered them jobs. There were endless free building plots, still many free spaces, lots of public housing, fat stock gains/dividends/interest income (5% and more on federal savings bonds for decades!) were possible, etc. I clearly see that the "fossil fuel" generation should make amends and be allowed to make sacrifices (intergenerational justice!) also in the area of housing construction/house building. Our generation and especially the generation born from 2010 onwards will have to bitterly swallow the mess "climate change" has caused. I do not want to play generations against each other but see the older generation as very much responsible.

And what are they supposed to do? Sell their house, which was paid off over 30 years, and move into 75 sqm in a 40-unit apartment block? And if not? Expropriation?

One should perhaps also once again remember that a single-family house represents a kind of luxury in every generation.

I cannot follow this line of thought. Single-family houses have always been something in my environment that was created through a lot of work, sacrifice, restrictions, etc. by those for whom it was important for themselves and/or their children. And again the note that in supposedly poorer countries, which we rightly support, the homeownership rate is higher. In addition, we are not only supposed to give up single-family houses but also not drive cars, not fly to foreign countries, not eat meat, and much more. For me, although I need none of this, the concrete question arises as to why people should then perform mostly externally determined, often "stupid," sometimes health-damaging jobs for almost their entire lives in order to support the "citizen community" through levies, fees, and taxes. I would also rather be a person of intellect; sacrifice is relatively easy for me, and in science fiction movies, we have probably all already seen fictional worlds and beings in which what is important to the average German citizen and non-average German citizen plays no role. Let's see where evolution will take us.

One must see that the generation before us greatly benefited from low raw material prices (gasoline, gas, emitted endless CO2 into the air because they could and didn't know better, etc.) and thus was able to achieve much prosperity.

And they take that prosperity with them to the grave? They neither support their children nor their grandchildren with it? But you do realize that the generation you mentioned partly entered working life at age 14 or 15? (Almost) without employee rights? That there was a 7-day workweek, a 45-hour workweek, etc.? Almost no labor or health protection during employment? How many flights or vacations (fits with Easter, let's look at the pictures of airports) has this generation undertaken? How many owned a car at 18? Did they all have their own room to study, were allowed to play, and could decide whether to attend a "higher school" to pursue their dream job? That many were traumatized or raised by traumatized parents for whom there was no help? When I think about it, they should actually have left it alone. Simply do nothing at all. Oh, I just remembered, back then there was almost no financial support for people who could not or did not want to participate in the economic cycle.

I do not want to play one generation against another ...

You do, but it is not really important. If you accuse people who have made omissions or mistakes out of ignorance, and demand "victims" from them, I wonder what your assessment of the current generation is, which already knows what is "wrong" and does it anyway. Maybe you can clarify which birth cohorts you mean; perhaps then I will have to take some things back. ;-)

...

: If I was a bit too harsh in my post directed at you, please forgive me. I certainly did not mean to offend you and only wanted to present my point of view. If I overstepped, I ask for your apology.