That's exactly the crux of the observation about land and rent-seeking that Monopoly seeks to illustrate - you can't just make more land.

Of course you can make more. Build a 10 story building and you've got 10x the floor space. People do that all the time in places were land is in short supply. Monopoly is a child's game that has no connection with how markets actually work.

And how often can you repeat this until you have effectively solved the optimum, and the situation devolves into zero-sum anyway? Are we growing the pie, or are we just rediscovering how big the pie is by optimizing better?

>Monopoly is a child's game that has no connection with how markets actually work.

Those aren't mutually exclusive. As far as I understand, the idea of Monopoly isn't to show how markets work. Its to show how finite resources such as land interact on a semi-free market. Which is exactly why lots of countries are now having problems with investors, foreign or not, buying up everything and driving up prices.

> having problems

Most countries hurt because investors avoid them.

> buying up

Meaning tons of money and investment is flowing into the country.

> And how often can you repeat this

No limit has been found, and certainly there's none in sight. Previous things running out:

1. rand out of wood for fuel. Now we use other fuels.

2. ran out of whales for whale oil. Now using other fuels.

3. Germany ran out of oil in WW2. They switched to alcohol and were developing other synthetic fuels.

4. The US ran out of rubber in WW2, developed synthetic rubber.

5. Ran out of farmland. Now use much more productive farming techniques. Vertical hydroponic farms are an emerging technology.

And so on. Interestingly, the countries that fail to adapt to change are socialist ones. The free market countries adapt.

> And how often can you repeat this

The sky is the limit. Or is it? When prices rise high enough everything gets possible.

In addition to my excellent sibling's note that this is a very finite solution to a boundless problem, land has a lot more uses than living space. Let's see a 10 story runway.

> this is a very finite solution to a boundless problem

Are you seriously concerned about running out of places to put a 10 story building? People will just start making 20 story buildings.

How many farms can you stack?

People have started building vertical farms with hydroponics. Some say it's the future.

> you can't just make more land.

Sure you can. Other planets, moons, habitats... It's just expensive. And the prices are not nearly high enough to justify the investments.

> There is no possibility of increasing the supply nor making more efficient use of existing supply.

Sounds pretty much like the housing market where I live.

Ones where government zoning and regulation prevent any change, sure. But you can't really blame the marketplace for that.

There is no such thing as a free market for housing, because the only thing stopping someone else from squatting in your house and telling you to get bent at any time is the government.

Land is inherently limited, and becomes more limited the higher the population concentration. Eventually this can lead to things like AirBnB and other rent seeking behaviors in the absence of government intervention leading to gentrification.

> because the only thing stopping someone else from squatting in your house and telling you to get bent at any time is the government.

You're suggesting the government is anti-ethical to the free market. On the contrary, the government is required for a free market. The role of government is protection of property rights and contract enforcement.

> Land is inherently limited

Land use, however, is not limited. For example, building a 10 story building increases the amount of usable "land" by a factor of 10.