That is a market. What might improve matters for actual humans is a non-market solution of some kind of rationing. Max 1 per customer, locals preferred.
> That is a market. What might improve matters for actual humans is a non-market solution of some kind of rationing. Max 1 per customer, locals preferred.
Except that the average person doesn't have the same access to financing as some minority of well connected entities to financing bodies. Access to cheap or even free lending. The fed prints more money than the economy actually creates.
It's a rigged market. That's why it doesn't work. Limiting properties would attenuate the problem, but it's just a bandade solution, and a few will again find loopholes to benefit.
> the average person doesn't have the same access to financing as some minority of well connected entities to financing bodies
That's .. also a market. The institutions have substantially greater ability to pay back, and in the case of banks, capital requirements that reduce their credit risk. They don't have the same loss of income risks as a human. Nobody should expect a market to produce a fair outcome from an uneven initial distribution.
Is there any evidence that access to Fed capital is controlled by political connections on an institution by institution basis?
Would be a much better market if supply were not restricted by so many zoning laws. Something like Japan does would be much better. http://urbankchoze.blogspot.com/2014/04/japanese-zoning.html