janeainsworth, absolutely, but I do not propose it as a serious policy more as a hook to make many of those complaining about our 'good fortune' think a bit more carefully.
How much people can afford to pay in mortgage payments each month is defined by their income. When interest rates are high, as they were until about 1995-2000, the proportion of the monthly payment that is interest rises so reduces the amount left for capital payment and this drives house prices down. When interest rates are low the proportion of the payment that is capital payment rises, so prices rise as well.
I suspect that the proportion of monthly household income paid out in mortgage payments has changed very little over the years.
The basis of calculation of how much can be borrowed has also changed. When most of us married and bought homes the Building Societies, would generally only lend on one income - the mans, or if they would lend on a second income they would only lend on half of it. Also many women were not working and most were poorly paid. So household income was much lower, even in real terms than now.
Now with more women in professional work, more likely to be working full time and more likely to be having salaries close to men's salaries and with lenders lending equally on joint incomes, house prices have gone up to match the rising household income.
The comparison factors taken into account by those complaining about our 'good fortune' are facile and limited. Just price comparisons between when we first bought and prices now. They fail to account for interest rates levels and household income levels never enters into it.