This is another huge myth in the US housing market, that big companies own lots of the housing and are jacking the prices up. It's simply not true. Large corporations own a tiny fraction of the market while the vast majority is owned by individuals and small landlords.

There's a lot of synergy and overlap between small landlords, property management companies, rent-fixing companies, and Wall St. It doesn't matter to the renter that their slum is owned by a tiny LLC that is nevertheless part of the broader constellation of anti-social rent-seeking behavior that is bringing down this republic.

investor market share of homes is down from its peak of 20% a few years ago, but i wouldn’t call it a “tiny fraction”

https://www.redfin.com/news/investor-home-purchases-stabiliz...

That is not limited to the US, in Berlin there was a popular vote to expropriate housing companies with more than 3000 units.

Yet those large housing companies charge on average between 7-8 €/m² and are nowhere near to holding a majority of the housing share.

Is it different in different places though? Like some places have more of this ownership problem and so it looks worse locally?

I wished they would bring these to the US but I don't think they are.

But is that true? Do new facts elbow out the old ones?

Maybe the new facts evict randomly from the cached index of facts? Or maybe they consolidate with old entries into new entries? Eviction from cache doesn't automatically mean deletion from long term storage.

in a way

i think if anyone sits down and has a conversation with their philosophical opposite, they're unlikely to treat the world the same afterwards

This seems like a fair assessment. Especially for all these tiny banks that are absolutely not too big to fail.