It's not a political stance, just a pro-accuracy one.
What i'm saying, and you're failing to understand is that a if citizen A has a million dollar house and 10K in savings but his income is very low, he is actually much much poorer than citizen B who has 1.01million in cash, 80K salary and rents an apartment.
>"Pro-accuracy" Its clearly obvious B has more economic impact, but with networth they seem as identical.
Citizen A can likewise sell his house, buy those same securities, and also live without working, but evidently doesn't have the same option to work for $80k/year and save even more, which is all the more reason he should diversify his portfolio.
Forgetting the potential salary (assume both lose their jobs and can't work ever again), they are exactly as rich as one another, but A has foolishly constructed his portfolio such that his house is 90%+ of his wealth. Yes, he is in a financially precarious situation due to his reliance on strong housing prices, but it's totally of his own design. He can sell at any time and cash out. If he can't actually sell (no one will buy the house for what it's "worth") then his house isn't really worth a million dollars.