Currently most people do not own land. Most owe the bank Money. Which would narrow those eligible to vote to basically nothing.
You don't quite understand how loans for your house work.
You own the house (well as much as anything can be owned when if you don't pay a government rent, police with guns come take it from you)
The Bank has an agreement that the house is collateral against the loan you took out and if you don't pay the loan, they can apply to the courts to take possession of the collateral.
So your statement is wrong.
Now as to why land ownership was originally a voting qualification is very simple. Your votes can affect you and your neighbors property and lives and finances for a long time to come. Given that, you want people to vote that actually have long term skin in the game, a renter is probably not going to care if they vote the taxes up so their kid can have a fancy 100 million football stadium to play in 5 to 10 times during a couple years there before they move on.
But a home owner who has lived there for 10 years or so and plans to be around for another 20 years or so, is going to think twice about how much they are going to have to pay over the next few decades for that stupidity.
Now as to well you could make a bunch of tiny land parcels, that's easily solved, you make it that you have to have to live on the property as your primary domicile and it's the minimum house size and standards as defined by the city / county / state.
This is pretty much the same as what the rules are here for claiming homestead exemptions on part of your tax bill for property that is your home.
If you are just renting, you probably aren't planning on staying there long, so why should the actual long term residents have to live with the results of your short term desires that don't take into account long term costs?
We see that here, where all the stupid apartment dwellers and renters are always voting for tax increases to get some shiny bauble, while most homeowners vote against the ever rising taxes. Then those same stupid renters are always bitching that their rents keep going up and they need to find a new place that's cheaper. Well no shit stupids, you just voted in a huge tax increase on properties...
Is it the be all end all of ways to fix voting? Probably not, because in many bigger cities corporations own huge amounts of the housing and only rent it out and buying is actually near impossible for all but the most wealthy.
Only being able to vote if you were a net taxpayer is another very good idea, but also has an issue with the problem that it would disenfranchise a large amount of people who are retired and essentially living off promises made to them that are being paid for by other workers, just as they paid for the promises made to the prior generation. (many don't get that is actually how it works).
So some kind of hybrid system where you have to either be a homestead owner, living on the property as your primary domicile, or that you are a net taxpayer. Then add in some thing about if you are on low income assistance aka welfare, (so it excludes social security and retirement / pensions payments) then you are not eligible to vote that year unless you wound up being a net taxpayer.
(Yes this excludes folks on retirement that just rent, as you could easily argue they may have little concern for what goes on long term, but only care about getting all they can).
Again, it's rather difficult to come up with something firm because everybody is going to whine about edge cases and whatever.
But the alternative is that it's all fair as everybody gets to vote and the masses vote themselves into oblivion while blindly trying to vote themselves free stuff that other people have to pay for.
actually wonder the hoops there are as far a foreigners buying property/Bahay ?
.
