Here's how it works after someone has challenged your evidence free opinion: "Here is why I believe what I believe <insert links>. I'm interested to hear why you believe what you believe. Can you tell me what led you to it?"

In this case, they asked me to back up my opinion with evidence, but hadn't given evidence for their opinion in the first place. So I said "You go first so that I'll know what you consider good evidence." Drives me crazy when people ask for evidence when they haven't yet volunteered their own.

I can at least as much as you can yours. You go first so that I can tell precisely what you consider ‘backing’, okay?

Oh dear. This isn’t an accurate recollection of the sequence of events at all. A longer memory is required.

It turns out that shame is a shortcut that doesn’t actually convince anyone, and when it crumbles it collapses spectacularly. Shockingly, only persuasion actually changes people’s minds.

There isn't going to be a runaway greenhouse effect and humans aren't going to go extinct - and climate experts don't say these things. They do say it will lead to exceedingly rough conditions for humans and will harm us enough that we will wish we had done differently.

So, just to be clear, I agree that the housing crisis is driven by local land use laws. Not sure you if you meant 'you' rhetorically or literally, so just clarifying in case.

I also believe the climate experts. But, they aren't the ones saying the threat is existential. It exists, but isn't that.

4. I'm glad you asked! You... BUILD LOTS OF HOUSING. Build more housing than new buyers want. This would cause housing prices to decline, which would make owning houses less attractive to corporations because their investment would be going down in value rather than up.

So, either way supply is it

3. is a problem everywhere, it can't really be driven by corporate ownership anywhere.

But, even if you don't believe the reality of the facts, consider pure logic: Assume corporations do actually own more than we know. The way to get them to sell is to make it unattractive for them to own. How?

2. Firstly, there really isn't much evidence corporations own that much housing. It's between 2 and 3 percent of all houses. However, there are a very few markets where they own more. But, to get to the average, that means they own even less in other markets, virtually none. Since affordability

It doesn't look especially #hardened against wildfire to me, and that should be a requirement when rebuilding. It seems to me, eaves should be minimized, it should be stucco, plantings should be succulents. I'm sorry to rain on their parade, but to me this is foolishness.

Queue up the liberals who will ridicule these desperate voters. Oh wait, they got here before me. Yeah, we liberals with our vaunted 'empathy'. yeesh.

Every progressive in the nation who has held their nose and voted for centrist democrats should loudly proclaim from now until the midterms that they have now been told they don't belong in the Democratic Party and will not be voting for any centrists who make it through to the general ballot.

Just like the MAGAs in the US, every accusation by China is a confession. They are the ones behaving aggressively and militaristically.