I don't see a meaningful distinction between "control" and the existence of selective subsidies. The US government directs agribusiness to produce specific crops by giving the industry more money to produce those crops congress wants. This is "control." Food safety rules are also "control" of the market.
As far as housing is concerned, GSE preferences (combined with additional support like the mortgage interest tax credit) distort the housing market by supporting owner-occupied housing, which is abnormal by global standards. This is deliberate shaping of the market, or "control" by most definitions.
Also with regard to housing, the market is directly controlled through zoning laws and building codes. Zoning controls housing availability to artificially inflate prices, and building codes theoretically control construction quality.
The government does not have a monopoly on the production and distribution of food or housing. They may use taxpayer dollars to induce supply in this respect or that, but they are not the sole provider.
As far as housing is concerned, GSE preferences (combined with additional support like the mortgage interest tax credit) distort the housing market by supporting owner-occupied housing, which is abnormal by global standards. This is deliberate shaping of the market, or "control" by most definitions.
Also with regard to housing, the market is directly controlled through zoning laws and building codes. Zoning controls housing availability to artificially inflate prices, and building codes theoretically control construction quality.
Food and housing are controlled markets.