>Let me try another way. Okay, no more weak, baseless and condescending ad hominem? > I understand you're very excited about Marx > I know you feel slighted

>Let me try another way. Okay, no more weak, baseless and condescending ad hominem? > I understand you're very excited about Marx > I know you feel slighted That didn't last long. You ask: how do we argue? We don't, because you've already performed your function. Recall why you engaged: I noticed that despite the topic's plainly economic roots in housing markets, literally nobody in the thread was talking about the dominant economic system, prompting you to contribute the idea that capitalism somehow bears no responsibilities for what happens to the steadily growing population of persons who specifically lack the capital to pay for shelter under its system. Effectively, you believe nobody actually lacks the protections of having capital under capitalism even when they don't have capital. That is a howling absurdity on its face, available for all to see, similar to a turd worn as a hat. I thank you for your help in demonstrating my point: indoctrination tends to make people believe absurdities and enforce taboos to suppress examination. Have a good weekend!