Did you hear yesterday’s controversial episode, and you’re having a hard time swallowing the possibility that the government could be involved in a long-term plan – a conspiracy theory, of sorts – to take control of the housing market? Listen in today for more evidence… and to see exactly how the newly manufactured “rent crisis” is just the latest step in the process. I’m Bryan Ellis. This is episode 173.----Hello, SDI Nation… welcome to the podcast of record for savvy self-directed investors like you!Wowzha! The response to yesterday’s episode #172 – which you can find at SDIRadio.com/172 – was pretty strong. If you’ve not yet heard it, you should listen in now before continuing. Now today’s episode is substantially more politically oriented than most, so if politics totally turns you off, you’ve got my permission to skip today’s show. BUT, I must warn you… you’ll see how, in just a couple of minutes, it all ties back together very directly into your interests as a self-directed investor.So I got a whole lot of supportive comments to episode #172, but some opposed as well. My favorite oppositional comments were from two extremes of the intellectual spectrum. On the one side, there’s Dean Germeten, who shared these “pearls of wisdom” with me:“Of COURSE there's a rental crisis, what with globalism and export of US jobs & factories, renters can't afford the rent being charged by a**-hole real-estate investors like you, who can't resist taking advantage of any crisis. House flipping should be illegal, as well as 2nd party owners, so long as there's one single-family home-owner who wants a place to raise his kids. You're the lowest form of capitalist parasite there is, hope your karma comes back and bites you hard, like Skreli.”Wow, Mr. Germeten… how’s life in that bubble of ignorance?And on the other side was my friend Lee in Florida, who also disagreed with me, but who lends some intellectual substantiation to his argument. Lee’s basic premises are two: first, that the Harvard study declaring a rental crisis could easily be made to reflect any particular opinion; and second, that there’s no way that the folks in the U.S. government are smart enough to effect a long-term – as in multi-decade – plan to silently overtake the U.S. housing market. He then added some comments about the Dodd-Frank law about which he’s totally right and I think justify a show of their own.So I’m going to address the rest of this show to Lee, because I suspect that the more thoughtful among you who disagree with me have a similar rationale. To set the stage, you should all know that I think very, very highly of Lee and his wife Betty. They’re incredibly bright people… the kind of people that I constantly find myself hoping to get to spend more time with. This is not manufactured praise; I really think very highly of them.So Lee, here’s the thing… I agree with you in a big way: There’s not a lot of competence on display in Washington. The policies I mentioned yesterday – the Community Reinvestment Act, TARP, ObamaCare – are all really good examples of ideas that were implemented and totally screwed up by the government. So your questioning my assertion that what’s happening today is part of a larger plan is entirely reasonable.But there are 2 flaws in that criticism that I see:First, your comments appear to assume that the goal of Congress and various Presidents is to implement strategy that is fiscally and practically wise from a long-term perspective. That simply isn’t the case. The model followed by the government is this: One party suggests an incredibly insane idea. The other party resists it, but not strongly so, in order to avoid being too objectionable. A piece of legislation that is 80% of what was originally demanded is implemented, but it’s structurally incomplete and destined for substantial problems in the future. These problems leave room for the government to swoop in in the future, and further expand the reach, power and influence of the g