Americans have a tendency to respect those who are "self-made men." This seems to include people whose fortunes have been made in real estate. The latest example in the news is the outgoing governor of New York, whose father, Bernard Spitzer, reportedly has a $500 million portfolio of properties, most or all in NYC.
I have nothing against real estate developers in their role as developers. They bring large amounts of money and multiple talents to bear to create new modern buildings on sites previously occupied by more modest buildings suitable to another decade or century. And when they build they generally create the venues in which dozens, even hundreds, of entrepreneurial visions can be made into reality, and where thousands, sometimes tens of thousands, of people can be employed in a single building. Appropriate development of choice sites, served by existing infrastructure such as NYC's elaborate transportation system and things as prosaic as city water, sanitary sewers, stormwater runoff, and all the other systems that are paid for by we-the-people: schools, public safety, public health, libraries, courts, hospitals, etc., means that specialized work can take in the center of the central business district, conducted by people who come from a 360 degree radius. It minimizes sprawl on the fringe, and makes the economy work more smoothly.
But there are other facets of the real estate business that I think are "opportunities for plunder" that should be restructured to serve the common good instead of the private good. This involves a revision of our notions of what is right, what is just, what is rightly private property and what legitimately belongs to the commons.