You can't have capitalism and a money printing central bank.
“Banking was conceived in iniquity and was born in sin. The bankers own the earth. Take it away from them, but leave them the power to create deposits, and with a flick of the pen they will create enough deposits to buy it back again. However, take it away from them, and all the great fortunes like mine will disappear and they ought to disappear, for this would be a happier and better world to live in. But, if you wish to remain the slaves of the bankers and pay the cost of your own slavery, let them continue to create deposits.”
― Josiah Stamp
There is a huge problem with people's concept of a free market. And it is that people think all things should be bought with the same money. And this is because most people do not realize the difference between the their wealth and the 0.01%'s wealth.
We should not be selling things that are necessary for life for common pool money, and even less, for a money that T.H.E.Y. can print out of thin air.
But, this isn't just about money, it is also about evil beings limiting the access to life essentials.
Housing, and why there are homeless
Those boomers who invested early in assets, where able to buy a house, and often, bought a second house. Now, why should they be allowed to buy a second house when there are people without?
Under our misunderstanding of capitalism and what is property, the answer is "of course they can buy it, if they can afford it".
However, from a society point of view, should the low person on the totem pole go without something which is a basic need for survival? And if there isn't enough for everyone, shouldn't we put all effort into building enough?
Unfortunately, we have fallen prey to good sounding (evil) words such as "keeping our small town feeling" or "keeping home prices up". These words have been used to restrict housing creation, which means that people have been left without a house.
Another question, should people be able to buy houses to rent as AirBNB while people in the area are without a house? Should any person or business be allowed to make money on a house, while someone is left without a house?
This is a really difficult question, because what it does is stop house building. No one can build houses for the poor for a profit. So, after about 80% housing, the builders will dry up.
The rich and the ultra rich
We don't really think about how rich the ultra-rich are.
The 0.1% could buy up all the houses in an area, or clean out all the grocery stores. If that is what they chose to do.
And then, if you think about entities like Black Rock, they can buy up all the houses. (because they can get infinite financing)
When you have a bunch of people that can't afford a house, and another that could afford all the houses, things do not work well when you are in a competitive buying market.
So, you either have the rich not compete, or have some rule like "1 house per person until everyone has 1", or you have some kind of special money for only house buying.
You might even have a cost added to mansions, where you pay for a mansion, you also pay for a tiny house for the poor. But this also adds problems.
Housing for everyone?
Another way we could look at this, is to build a tiny house for everyone. Every man woman and child. A really bare minimum place to live. We in America would have no problem knocking these out. And they would probably cost less that what we spend on Section 8 housing right now.
As long as people were allowed to own a house, and the houses weren't made so expensive by rich people buying them all up to keep the riff-raff out, or whatever excuse, then this could work. Everyone has a bare minimum place to live, and those with more money can buy whatever they can afford.
The problem here is that govern-cement, and those mother WEFers want to confine people to the tiny homes/pods/15 minute prisons. And so, this housing for everyone project could easily be subverted into having pods for all the goyim, and mansions for all the "better" people.
The problem with housing is that we added all the bads together to get a very bad.
- debt based, fiat currency that can be printed out of nothing.
- Restricted house building
- People buying houses for not living in (AirBNB, investment with no tenant …)
- People buying a 2nd house while people are homeless.
- Bidding war style house pricing.
And, of course, the Pareto Principal means that there will always be someone who can afford many houses, while many at the bottom cannot afford one.
Fortunately, i see the communities of the future making sure to build housing for their up and coming next generation. And these houses will not really be for sale, they are the community's property for the community (no govern-cement involved)
But, today we see a place where (late stage, crony) capitalism really fails.