It seems that you’re making a claim about what policies are possible; I don’t have enough domain knowledge here to disagree. My point was just that If most vot

It seems that you’re making a claim about what policies are possible; I don’t have enough domain knowledge here to disagree. My point was just that If most voters are opposed to your solution, it won’t happen - even if that means nothing happens and we maintain the broken status quo - regardless of whether it is the only way forward within our current legal framework. In other words, noting that while it sounds viable from a raw economics perspective, it might hit problems with voter acceptability. And voters do care about what “aught to have happened”, for better or worse.