Sort of, and sort of not. While lots of ordinary people cannot afford to but a home, most of the people who currently own the property in this country are also just ordinary people. If they caused a deflation in housing prices which brought them into the reach of the majority of people at 3 times their wages, all the people who own houses already would be screaming blue murder.
Damned if you do, damned if you don't.
- I agree with the idea that a house should be a place to live rather than an investment opportunity, and think that a long term house building program which ensures supply is able to meet demand could stop house prices from rising in a manner which meant that as wages went up the house price to wage ratio gradually came down until it was no more than 3x average wage. It wouldn't be popular though as lots of people expect their house to earn them money, and would be the sort of policy which would be likely to see just about anybody who promised to cancel it get elected as house ownership is around 65% and people are generally greedy little ferrets.
Such a program wouldn't actually cost anybody money of course, because if all the property prizes are frozen then the value of a house remains the same compared to all the other houses and everybody is still able to move about as they are not actually suffering negative equity, they're just not actually making money, but too many people just don't think like that for it to work.