> It's quite easy to replace `government` with `a large private company` in your hypothetical: Yeah that's kind of my point! This would very obviously be pred

> It's quite easy to replace `government` with `a large private company` in your hypothetical: Yeah that's kind of my point! This would very obviously be predatory if it were a real estate conglomerate, which is something government should protect people from, not actually just become themselves!! > Should land -- a scare, limited resource -- be a private or public asset? I believe you're coming at this from the former perspective This is completely irrelevant to the topic, because in this case we are talking about a situation where land is being treated as a private asset, and a government is acting like a private real estate conglomerate You can challenge it on grounds of what "should" be, but that's an entirely different discussion