Must be fun spending the whole day looking for technicalities to address.

No, I just understand how to make valid criticisms. First step before you can criticize is to understand what you're criticizing

Apparently not because you didn't even understand what the GP was calling a bold claim (it wasn’t land being nontransable).

Really? You must have missed that the exact sentence that they quoted was based around the term that they didn't understand

It's not backwards. Calling housing and land an X and saying that this means it should have heavy state intervention IS a bold claim regardless of what X is because it's calling for heavy state intervention.

Compare: "Abortion is a non-transable good and therefore there should be heavy state intervention in it." "Video games are non-transable goods and so there should be heavy state intervention in it." "Cryptography is a non-transable good and therefore should heavily be regulated by the government."

All of these are BOLD claims regardless of what non-transable means, and it's appropriate to ask what non-transable means in order to understand why the bold claim stands.

Sorry, but this is a non-transable comment, and I only reply to transable comments.

I like your style, you made me laugh.

I think you missed the point I was making