Personal Finance

I understand your need to be critical, and concerns about stability, but I don't think we're talking about whether it will be a "tough process" (boo hoo) or what "the smart ones" will do (it's a fallacy that wealthy equates to intelligent, see Elon Musk and others)... And if we're discussing making something illegal than I'm assuming in the realm of discussion we can also close loopholes (such as limiting gifting to family members and people with less than two homes)... So I think when you re-read the title of the article we're commenting on, I think you'll find your objections all cater to situations and edge cases that are all smaller and less important than the problem we're looking for a solution for.

So I'm not seeing any substantial objections other than political unwillingness to do the tough process which may ultimately need to be done. Because letting the basic necessities become a weapon of class war seems to be the alternative, and I'm not saying that from any Marxist motivations, but instead I'm saying out of concerns for National Security.

Once something economic becomes subject to class war, it starts to be subject to foreign powers, and can be used as a soft form of pre-warring.

Let's say for instance, China and Russia are willing to buy homes on mass and refuse to to rent or sell them? Well, all of a sudden you start to see society become fragile and decline... And who says this hasn't already been trialed in some degree, and what if this was done with farms and food production.

Correct and accurate market regulations is becoming more of a concern for National Security and prosperity.

Most western countries need something like the GI Bill, which funded the construction of over 2.7 million homes. That was a tough process too. But everyone realized it was an important one too.