• 𝕯𝖎𝖕𝖘𝖍𝖎𝖙
    link
    89 months ago

    I am fine with demoing the buidlings and creating new apartments / condos if that’s what it takes. It just seems like this wouldn’t be true for all buildings, but maybe most. You’re right that the owners of these properties are placing a huge bet on their buildings being used for commercial use again. The city should tax vacant buildings higher to discourage squatting on these properties by commercial investors.

      • 𝕯𝖎𝖕𝖘𝖍𝖎𝖙
        link
        39 months ago

        Unless that’s what I just described (a land value tax), I’m not sure what you’re saying here.

        • R0cket_M00se
          link
          English
          49 months ago

          It’s exactly what you described.

          Essentially people will hold onto property in order to make more money on it through land value inflation.

          If we tax the crap out of property that isn’t being used, then either the tenant will do something with it or sell it to someone who will, instead of just waiting for the market to double their money while they play golf.

            • R0cket_M00se
              link
              English
              39 months ago

              It seemed sensible when the economist Henry George postulated it as the solution for wealth inequality and the seeming rise of material desire that the uber-rich cause in the market. Unfortunately no one listened and the landlords won, and now we’re here.

              • 𝕯𝖎𝖕𝖘𝖍𝖎𝖙
                link
                39 months ago

                landlords with corporate money and lobbyists, I imagine. hopefully some change can happen on a city level.