Hubby and I were talking last night about the game. He doesn't post here, but said I should pose this idea/question and see if anybody else thought there was logic to it. The sim economy's growth is very stunted, damn near to the point of atrophy, and while talking about it hubby had this thought outloud. There are *alot* of homeless sims, some by choice, and others because of the cost of real estate. Hubby's train of logic was that if they lowered the cost of a plot of land by one-third to 50%, but left every single thing the same, he seemed to think this might stimulate some of the drains in the game, because sims would then have land to build on, need furniture, skill objects or moneymaking objects if they were that kind of property, be using the NPCs for services, be spending money filling buffets and fridges, etc., whereas now, people seem basically to be stockpiling trying to afford everything at once, because the land alone costs exhorbitant amounts of money compared to what sims are used to paying, while the price of objects is basically normal to how things used to be, it's payouts that has changed. So, he thinks that EA should lower the cost of land, and see if that will stimulate the growth of the economy by people having to fill their houses, like he thinks it would. It might work, it might not.....we just wanted to get your opinion, and to see if Lee, Greg or Pari might comment themselves as to why land is so expensive, and see if they might see it differently now.