Why don't you pay some of your neighbors' rent? You admit you could afford an increase, and you want people to sacrifice their disposable income for the benefit of others' housing, right?
I'd say that the onus is more on people not actively screwing over other people for their own gain, versus relying on people like me to somehow choose which of their neighbors is most deserving of charity.
The exact reason why we have legal limitations to property rights in these cases is to require that landowners sacrifice some of their disposable income for the benefit of others -- and the benefit of the public good. I think the law has the intent correct, there, even if the implementation of it leaves something to be desired.
