• w3dd1e@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    10
    ·
    2 days ago

    It’s this. I work in commercial real estate. If a “goes dark” (stops doing business at the location), property owners can have loan obligations such as as cash management (the bank receives tenant rent checks directly instead of the person who owns the property). This happens even if the tenant is still paying rent because if office in the strip mall closes, no one goes to the restaurants and in turn they can’t pay rent either.

    Personally, I disagree with this. This feels like we are forcibly propping up this system instead of letting it evolve naturally. I think we should let those corporate zones die and move restaurants and shopping closer to residential areas.

    • grue@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      11
      ·
      edit-2
      1 day ago

      This feels like we are forcibly propping up this system instead of letting it evolve naturally.

      Crony-capitalism in a nutshell.

      Literally, this is the inevitable result of failing to properly regulate the market: it gets regulatory-captured by the big corps to prop themselves up instead. This is what laissez-faire always devolves to, by its inherent nature.

      • w3dd1e@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        18 hours ago

        Why would the government want to regulate it? They set themselves up to collect taxes by location. They won’t risk disruption of sales tax in those jurisdictions.

        It’s turtles all the way down.