I can reword it because I've seen it written before. I am not sure if I believe what they are saying or not, and have no real desire to get involved on either s

I can reword it because I've seen it written before. I am not sure if I believe what they are saying or not, and have no real desire to get involved on either side of the argument going forward. Rewritten: > A large percentage of real estate is being purchased as investments and geopolitical hedges by extremely wealthy individuals. In many cases, this can be be literally to assist in money laundering. This effect is especially pronounced in "global cities" (NYC, London, Paris, LA, Singapore, Tokyo, Shanghai, etc.), and especially in politically stable countries (So that probably excludes Shanghai). These are usually left empty, because income isn't their primary goal. This is considered to be a significant effect because the property types are those intended to be purchased by owner-occupants (e.g. condos), and therefore the supply is consumed. The complaint is not that the new owner of a massive apartment complex is a different major corporation/rich person. Really rich people will prevent any form of correction to the market so they do not lose wealth.