The original reason is that in classical economical theory land is often used as an example of something that doesn't get improved if you invest in it (no, not seriously, but like a thought experiment). So therefore someone owning the land and taking money for usage of it would lead to marked inefficiency. Industry built on the land would have an extra cost to production that strictly wasn't necessarily needed, as the land is considered worthless on it's own. Also, considering that a lot of land was owned by very few people, often given to them for arbitrary reasons, this was somewhat true at times. The nobility and clergy had a lot of land and just didn't do shit with it.
That being said. Someone who rents out an apartment or house do not fit this bill, as the apartment deteriorates over time. To be able to compete you would have to invest in it. So they probably just hate the landlord because he takes their hard earned Patreon money.
A lot of modern socialism differs between houses and other property. Non-communist socialism (or just mixed economy if you find that to be an oxymoron) often try to charge different taxes for household and property meant for renting. As they want the workers to be able to afford their own houses, not rent.