When ownership shows up at zoning meetings, the main risk they seem to be concerned about is accidentally letting someone build enough housing. Heaven forbid!
My neighbors, the homeowners who don't rent, are typically on the other side. And it's not unreasonable to want to keep SFH neighborhoods predominantly SFH.
My main risks have have absolutely nothing to do with more housing. It's more physical risk to the property and depreciation.
As we speak, close to a billion people are in the middle of ongoing wars. There are entire countries where land is worthless. Ukraine has several hundred square kilometers of land with a thick covering of fiber optic cables from drones.
I have a much better idea: point, laugh, and say "sucks to suck!"
I'm telling you why the system works like it does now. You can, of course, choose to deliberately not understand it.
No, the system works the way it does because it was built by the rich, for the rich, to ensure they had a way to get paid for being rich. You can, of course, choose to deliberately not understand that.
Good luck changing things without understanding how they work though.
Where did they say that?
I take your overall point about rich people making laws. But on this specific point you're wrong. Take the L.
If you think insurance will save you, it might not if no one is willing to insure your property (large true in California nowadays) or the insurance company goes bankrupt in a crisis (happens pretty much all the time).