Based on the idiocy we've seen in real estate over the last few years, the government can't do any worse than the banking and real estate appraisal industries have already done.
What if someone wants to sell their home for 50% more than the appraised value? What if a willing buyer can be found at that price?
Oh, goodie. We needed more strings-attached government ideas.
Someone who can put up a lot of cash for a home will be in a great position to outbid others . . . and that's a very good thing.
When has that ever NOT been the case? Those with cash can always outbid those who don't. It's axiomatic. How is that a "good" thing?
Based on the idiocy we've seen in real estate over the last few years, the government can't do any worse than the banking and real estate appraisal industries have already done.
Feh. You've obviously not spent a lot of time observing government. The "idiocy" you note has been a direct result of government getting involved, and pushing banks to offer things like "subprime" mortgages. Barney Frank was warned against this kind of thing back in 2002, and he explicitly stated that he "wanted to roll the dice", so that those who can't afford homes can have a shot at them anyway. Moronic... and entirely the product of government, and NOT in the real estate industry.
(Lenders are somewhat culpable, since they were happy to float billions, if not trillions, in these new loans, knowing full well that the actuarial tables were screaming in disagreement... but since they got the green light from government to try to make some extra profits, I cannot blame them too much. The exacerbating problem is that government won't allow these banks to go under for making these bad choices. Once again, when we try to avoid natural economic consequences, even worse things pop up.)
What if someone wants to sell their home for 50% more than the appraised value? What if a willing buyer can be found at that price?
Gee, then we'd have laissez faire capitalism, and a nice little sale (and a heck of a commission!). Sadly, that isn't what's being offered here... and, by the way, do you honestly think that your hypothetical situation actually occurs in the real world in more than 0.0001% of all home purchases?