>Not everything has to be a market, for example healthcare can be provided using market or non-market logic.
There's still physical limitations on resources available; picking a different distribution doesn't lift the limit of how much stuff we have.
>we can just get rid of the parts we don't want through laws
Successful market design is quite a bit more complex than that. Every market intervention has all sorts of second-order effects.
>In homeownership we want to get rid of most of the frictions of the market that rub up against long-time asset holders.
I'm still quite aggrieved that homeowners in 1978 decided to vote themselves a structure that enriches themselves at the expense of newcomers to the area. More generally, it's a mistake to focus on the benefits of a policy without considering the costs - prop 13 does good for long-time homeowners in the region, but at the expense of literally everyone else. I don't think that's a tradeoff worth making, especially given the dead-weight losses from restricting sales and price communication.
There's still physical limitations on resources available; picking a different distribution doesn't lift the limit of how much stuff we have.
>we can just get rid of the parts we don't want through laws
Successful market design is quite a bit more complex than that. Every market intervention has all sorts of second-order effects.
>In homeownership we want to get rid of most of the frictions of the market that rub up against long-time asset holders.
I'm still quite aggrieved that homeowners in 1978 decided to vote themselves a structure that enriches themselves at the expense of newcomers to the area. More generally, it's a mistake to focus on the benefits of a policy without considering the costs - prop 13 does good for long-time homeowners in the region, but at the expense of literally everyone else. I don't think that's a tradeoff worth making, especially given the dead-weight losses from restricting sales and price communication.