So just describe it as "don't let the greedy landlords have their way" because the greed landlords want to limit housing supply.

> But the point that I'm trying to get across here with no small amount of irony (that I hope is fairly obvious)

I kind of figured, but actual communists will occasionally show up to say the same sort of thing and then it's just Poe's Law again.

> What provided safety, stability and a guaranteed standard of life was the semi-serfdom imposed by the state.

And there are a lot of people who would willingly be serfs if it meant stability.

The trouble is, it actually doesn't. Monopolies and unaccountable bureaucrats have short-term stability, where short-term is often something like a few decades. But being insulated from competitive pressure makes them long-term unfit, and then they eventually crumble. And the years leading up to the fall have a tendency to be increasingly unpleasant.

> The Soviet system did allow for movement. When a factory was opened and had to be staffed, permits were issued for the necessary people. In fact that was the only significant way for people from rural areas to be allowed the privilege to move to a city. Similarly, the problem with doctors was dealt with rather elegantly - every graduate of a medical school was assigned a specific town or village and was forced to live and practice there for decades.

This is one of the other reasons that system tends to fall apart.

Suppose you need something that doesn't come from within your jurisdiction. You haven't got any rare earths in the ground where you are etc. Well, you can just buy them from whoever has them, but then that country is never going to want to join your system because then you'd be taking their natural resources and sending back politburos instead of cash money.

Meanwhile the same thing happens to anyone there who is producing more than they consume. They want to leave. The Berlin Wall wasn't there to keep the Americans out.