at which point your profit becomes linked to the degree to which you provide the functionality
except when the commodity is a basic necessity and there's no alternatives. 'the market' can't really 'vote with their wallet' on the cost and quality of shelter, particularly when price fixing is rampant.
sidenote: 'voting with your wallet' implies people with more money than you should have more say in what's 'more valuable', because the rich can always outbid you, and homo economicus is only a thought experiment. (see: foreign real estate investment, conspicuous consumption…)
you mean the migration 'crisis' and collapse in '"living" standards' which were brought on by US-EU neoliberalism driving down the standard of living in other parts of the world before coming home to roost?
there are certainly ways of reversing direction, but people in the core would sooner choose literal fascism before giving up their imperial lifestyle. they use the IMF to politically terraform 'underdeveloped nations' and export their own harms so they can say they're 'meeting climate goals', and then complain about all the emissions and migrants coming from those countries which are ravaged to supply their hyperconsumption. the same migrants which predominantly staff their service, medical and technology sectors to prop up their precious treats and their oh-so superior 'knowledge economies'.
voting for fascism is the individualistic choice which lets them keep their treats and means they don't need to interact with their neighbours or advocate for real change. it's easier to blame the victims of their actions than to cut the DARVO shit and accept responsibility.