First, thank you for the thoughtful and detailed comment. It was really well thought out and really hit on some excellent points. This is the feedback I was hoping for. I’m a software developer by profession, not someone who writes legislation, so the whole proposition is basically spitballing until something usable comes out.

You make some really good points and I agree with them for the most part. I’m going to sit and think on this some and get back to you after I’ve had some time to digest it more.

When you understand that crashing the economy makes him and wealthy investors richer, it makes sense what he’s doing. The sane washing is because the people telling you it makes sense are owned by people who stand to make a lot of money. If people lose their homes, that building doesn’t just disappear. It gets bought by investors for cheap who then rent it out. Collapsing economies is how wealthy collect more assets and passive income. A great explanation here by Gary Stevenson: https://youtu.be/XCnImxVWbvc