What you'd need is a military operation (a war). There are many reasons not to do that.
And many to do. It'd be analogous to how, at one point, the British Empire was convinced by Christian militants to put its Navy in the service of ending chattel slavery, and then went and did exactly that.
Too bad they don't make Christian militants like they used to.
Okay, you need to take a deep breath, then start looking into how things are done in the real world. That's quite different from how things are done in the fantasy construct built by the books, blogs, YouTube channels, etc. of your current ideological bubble.
Actual investments tend to increase in value because they are productive assets.
That's the ideal. Free-market idealists, such as Libertarians and Classic Liberals, believe that's all there is to it. Capitalists (not the same thing) see things differently. For them, investment is anything that increase their wealth, no matter what.
Hence, while productive assets are a type of investment, there are others. Rent extraction is one such. Forming cartels is another. Productive-asset-providers destruction is a fourth. Buying the best made-to-order laws from sovereign law-selling States in the free market of laws is a fifth. And so on, and so forth.
So! Housing is a rent-seeking investment type that, for maximum ROI, involves as operational costs primarily law-buying, and secondarily cartel-formation (enabled by the purchased laws). It transfers wealth up is an extremely profitable manner and, therefore, is an excellent opportunity for those operating at a scale they can in fact buy the necessary laws.
As long as housing is an investment, they won't. The entire modern Western economy is built around the concept of "number go up". Investments are allowed downward moves only temporarily. After a while, number must go up no matter what, and if it doesn't naturally, the laws necessary for it to happen will be purchased as necessary.
half the country didn't want this
Is that half country right now on the streets, participating in a general strike, paralyzing trade and traffic on most cities, and causing massive economic damage to the billionaires and their pocket politicians?
Or is the vast, vast, VAST majority of that half country passively allowing all of this to happen unchallenged, unwilling to dirty their hands in active subversive political action?
If the latter, well, inaction is a choice, and all choices have consequences. Hence, to all Americans who are day in, day out, choosing to do nothing, by all means, enjoy the fruits of those 226 -- and counting -- deliberate choices.
We could also put substantially higher taxes on homes purchased after the first that applies to both people and companies to prevent them from being used as investment opportunities.
The problem is boomers run most rich countries now, an unintended consequence of having population growth dropping below replacement level. They either are, or are becoming, the major political force most everywhere that matters, politicians almost invariably bowing to their will. And they want their retirement plans working as intended. So, no, housing isn't going to come down, or if it does, it's at best going to be temporary.
You're narrow conversationalist, aren't you? Let me address this then: I'm in favor of voter ID. There, done, you can rest the 99.999% of your argument. Now read EVERYTHING ELSE (or watch the video).
By the way, this is how it's done in my country:
a) Our law says voting is a full right that must be granted by the government, so the government makes it certain that every citizen all over the country MUST be able to vote. No expense must be spared by the government in facilitating voting.
b) Voting requires an ID.
c) You can get a national ID, that doubles as a voter ID, by several means. The government goes out of its way to make it as easy as possible. Any community that has difficulty accessing ID'ing places have government officers going there to ID them. Also, it's free.
d) Voting days are always on a weekend or a national holiday, to make it easier for the vast majority of the population to go vote. Public transportation is made free, to make it even easier. All public schools are made into polling stations, to make it even easier than that.
e) There's no gerrymandering, as voting in representatives isn't by county, but by State. Anyone within the State can vote for any representative candidate from the State. Also, no electoral college, here it's one person, one vote, no funny nonsense about some less populated areas this or that.
f) Voting is obligatory. If someone refuses to go vote, and they don't have a legally valid excuse for that refusal, they get blocked from accessing several Federal public services until they pay a fine. This makes sure voting is always representative of the will of the majority of the population.
g) Finally, protest voting is placing a non-existent number on the ballot, such as 00 or 99. But the person does go there and does type the number, so there's an official count of how many protested by actively voting in "none of the above".
That's how it ought to be, everywhere.
Explain how Trump is putting a thumb on the scale or STFU.
This article goes into it in details. If you prefer a video summarizing the key tactics and strategies, this one is 14 minutes long, so short enough, though not shorter.
So almost exactly the same Trump wants the FED doing?
Since you talked about economic understanding, please tell us, what are the difference between today and the 1930's that will make the current attempt with tariffs not merely do better than that one did, but in fact have the diametrically opposite result?
You mean he's "fixing" the election with rules requiring that only documented citizens can vote?
No. I mean "he's making an immense effort to pack everything election related with pure MAGA loyalists who must vow the last election was 'stolen'. And they'll make sure, this time around, no matter the hurdles, no matter the will of the people, no matter the laws, that it won't be 'stolen' again."
If he was "merely" requiring ID in all the law allows the Federal government to require IDs, he'd be no different from any other GOP president.
It seems like the Democrats are just unwilling to undo the damage.
Consider they may not actually see it as damage. Do you know of any substantial thing a GOP administration has done that a subsequent Democrat one fully reversed? Sure, in trivial things they do, they need to, to appease their idealist voters, but it looks like Democrats do like to wield the power the GOP amassed once it's their turn.
Governing via EOs is poised to become addictive.
He did once before, this time will be different?
Because last time he was forced to, and this time he's making an immense effort to pack everything election related with pure MAGA loyalist who must vow the last election was "stolen". And they'll make sure, this time around, no matter the hurdles, no matter the will of the people, no matter the laws, that they won't be "stolen" again.
Not if they rely on actual data, the kind that hasn't been massaged or adjusted by sycophants of Al Gore.
You know conspiracy theories are like STDs, in that if you got one, you got three, right?
So, why not go all in? Don't stop at blaming Al Gore. Start blaming the reptilians. It's funnier that way!
What part of "the enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people" isn't clear?
If the people have had from eternity a right granted by nature/a god, they have that right. No legal system can remove that right legitimately. They can remove that right illegitimately, but then that makes the law that removed the right simply an invalid law.
If you want, look into the Bible. It makes it clear there that abortion isn't murder, but loss of property. The punishment, in case of wrongful abortion, and if the would-be parents were to decide to punish it, is for the father (not the mother, the father) to establish a monetary fine and demand it be paid by the person who caused the involuntary abortion, as he (not her, he) lost his property the woman was provided a vessel for. If the father doesn't mind the loss, it's his property to do with whatever he wants, including throwing it away, so no problem.
Every young man should have a hobby: learning how to handle money is the best one. -- Jack Hurley
