[lliamander]

I think its more than just what we pay for these services, I think there is the variability that is introduced to a market when people invest in that market not for the value of the good or service, but merely as an instrument of financial leverage.

If people bought houses merely to live in, prices would probably be lower and would be subject to much less volatility. Of course, there would be downsides as well (no houses available for rent, etc.) so I'm not suggesting we do away with finance.

In fact, I have no suggestions. I'm just pointing out that finance (treating goods and services as abstract financial instruments) creates opportunities for growth at the expense of added volatility to the markets being abstracted.

[pbhjpbhj]

> Of course, there would be downsides as well (no houses available for rent, etc.) so I'm not suggesting we do away with finance. //

Local government could own rental houses, then rents would return to the local economy reducing taxes.

What other examples are there in this specific case, if people [could] only privately own[ed] houses to live in?