I feel like the smart and humanitarian thing to do would be to make it so that whenever homelessness is above a preset inescapable amount such as 2%, or when there are more renters than homeowners, that it should be heavily fined and taxed for corporations and businesses to own more than a single home dwelling for rent purposes.

I for one favor a progressive tax on corporate ownership of single family dwellings (1-4 family residences) where the penalty for owning these dwellings is equal to an increase in tax at the federal level at 100% * the number of dwellings owned by the business.

So when you have companies that own a thousand homes they would have to pay a thousand times the annual property taxes on each of those homes in order to keep them.

Of course, you don't just dump this on the market. You passed the rule, give them 2 years to prepare themselves and then roll out the taxes at an increase of 10% * the number of houses per year until they are at the 100% mark.

That would cause all of these businesses to liquidate the homes back into the market and allow prices to come down gradually so that individuals could own and purchase the homes while also generating a significant amount of tax revenue.

That in my opinion would be the easiest and most surefire way to solve the homelessness crisis without exploding the real estate market or causing any kind of major recession.

It's a lack of controls on capitalism itself. Absolute capitalism works just as poorly as absolute socialism. As with everything in life, the best way to operate is by balancing extremes against each other.