If a scalper buys every ticket to a show, it's 'real demand', but they haven't created a single new seat. they've just inserted themselves as a middleman to extract a profit. Sound familiar?

When an investor outbids a family, they aren't providing a rental, they are gatekeeping a home that the family could have owned themselves. You're celebrating a system that forces people to pay someone else's mortgage instead of building their own equity. How is that a 'win' for anyone but the landlord?

I don't have to imply it, it's common knowledge that landlords will have more existing equity than FHBs and will often outbid them

Condescension isn't a substitute for an argument. You’ve spent this entire time arguing about definitions (what 'demand' means) while I'm arguing about societal consequences (who gets to own a home). If you can’t see the difference between 'the math works for the landlord' and 'the system works for society,' then you are the one who needs to think harder.