3 ms·
I have a lot of problems with this post. * Photos of boarded up storefronts are used to imply that these stores are out of business. They're not, the reason th
by Invictus0 6y ago
I have a lot of problems with this post.
* Photos of boarded up storefronts are used to imply that these stores are out of business. They're not, the reason they're boarded up is because of BLM rioters.
* Photos are not good evidence of real estate availability. No data is used or sought.
* I don't accept the handwavy notion that people leaving the city will automatically tank pension funds. The closure of the Chinese restaurant in the city is the opening of the Chinese restaurant in the suburbs. People still want to be near stores and restaurants and they can get that without being in the city.
* Even less do I accept the notion that everything we as a society undertake should ultimately benefit pension funds. This is a euphemism to get people to believe that corporate interests are your interests. The average American is not invested in the market and the people that are invested should have been made aware that market returns are not guaranteed.
I do agree that we are seeing an emergency in the Fed's debt spending. Future historians will probably look at the Coronavirus meltdown as the Gavrilo Princip moment that exposed the house of cards.
- syncsynchalt 6y agoBusinesses (at least in Denver) were boarded up months before the riots. It's about the property being unattended, plywood is quick and easy to put up as well as take down when the employees are back. I agree that they shouldn't be used to imply the business is permanently closed. The effect in the photos is still pretty striking.