It would depend on who most of the renters were. I live in the suburbs, and people who rent often take every bit as good care of, or better care of, the property as those who own the property in which they live.
When my children were very young my husband and I rented two different houses. Believe me, I was concerned more about the kids of the people who owned some of the houses in the area (and, again, it was a generally nice suburb) than any of the home-owners ever had to be over my children.
As a professional couple with a nice home and beautiful, well behaved, little kids; my husband and I dealt with the snobbery of some of the people who owned their homes on the street; and - oh brother - I don't know who the hell they thought they were. Ordinarily I'm not one to be "like this', but our income was higher (a lot higher) than a lot of theirs. So was education level higher than a lot of theirs. One reason we didn't own a home is that we came of "house age" in the days of 17% interest rates. People who got to house-buying age ten years before we did got their houses for 35,000 and low-interest, fixed, mortgages. By the time we got there, houses were over 75,000 (with high interest rates, particularly on fixed mortgages), so we rented for awhile.
Having the fact that we were "RENTERS" rubbed in our face at every neighborhood get-together was obnoxious, especially coming from the "hardly-high-class" people it was coming from.
Of course, it may depend on whether you live in a suburb or an an upscale/young-professionals type of urban neighborhood; or instead live in a borderline ghetto where renters ruin houses and homeowners either don't do much better, or else are essentially (or out-and-out) slum-lords.