3 ms·
It's a bit depressing to see the greed-by-framing here. I feel like the banks are playing musical chairs rather than trying to operate sustainably. It seems lik
by floatingatoll 6y ago
It's a bit depressing to see the greed-by-framing here. I feel like the banks are playing musical chairs rather than trying to operate sustainably. It seems like a more efficient approach — one that is not as economically destructive to GDP after the pandemic — would be:
1. Retailer notifies their lease holders that a given location is impacted by public health closures, reducing revenues for products originating from that location from (100% of $X) to (y% of $X), and warns the leaseholder that the retailer may be forced to file bankruptcy if easement is not granted, reducing rent paid to (0% of $X).
2. Leaseholder notifies their mortgage holder of this, and warns the mortgage holder that the leaseholder may be forced to file bankruptcy if easement is not granted, reducing mortgage paid to (0% of $X).
3. Mortgage holder notifies the property tax authorities of this, and warns those authorities that the lendor may be forced to file bankruptcy if easement is not granted, reducing property tax paid to (0% of $X).
4. Property tax authority grants a public health easement to the mortgage holder, conditional on the same easement being granted to the leaseholder.
5. Mortgage holder grants a public health easement to the lease holder, conditional on the same easement being granted to the retailer.
6. Lease holder grants a public health easement to the retailer.
If anyone refuses to grant the easement, they get nothing anyways, because anyone in the stack can just give up and file for bankruptcy as a last resort — and that's where we're at today. It feels like a shell game because they're all trying to extract the maximum amount of money before bankruptcy, while withholding it until they themselves can file bankruptcy. It's such a shame they can't work together to get everyone that's owed a dollar to agree to just suspend their demands for their dollar until this is over. They're not getting their dollar either way, but if they'd rather have their tenants breaking leases left and right, so be it.
- gremlinsinc 6y agothat would've been the smart thing to do... or a mandate from the top down fed > banks > lenders > corp|residential landlord > tenant to allow partial payments based on need, until crisis is over. Everyone succeeds then. Might still need some stimulus for the bottom 10% of society but maybe not as badly.
- dencodev 6y ago7. Abolition of private property
- AnimalMuppet 6y agoYour "cure" is worse than the disease.
- wins32767 6y agoYou need a 4. Federal government issues $$$ to property tax authority to cover income gap. The property tax authority needs that revenue now to pay their bills (teachers, sanitation, fire, EMT, police, etc), an easement won't cut it. They need a backstop before they can do that since all of those are critical or legally mandated services and municipalities run very lean.
- supertrope 6y agoYes. Property tax shortfalls leads to laying off teachers.
- munk-a 6y agoSecuring that funding is going to be a hard sell when the Dept of Edu is really enthusiastic about scrapping the whole "public education" thing for charter schools since charter schools have an out to get around silly things like Brown v. BoE[1] and, more importantly to them, Engel v. Vitale[2]. 1. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brown_v._Board_of_Education https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brown_v._Board_of_Education 2. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Engel_v._Vitale https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Engel_v._Vitale
- deleted 6y ago[deleted]
- supertrope 6y agoIt's not just property tax. The investors who fund the mortgages would have to take a haircut. Which could destabilize banks, pensions, insurance companies, any institution relying on endowment earnings to operate, etc.
- floatingatoll 6y agoThey're investors. Investments are not guaranteed. They're going to take the same haircut either way, whether or not the suspension of payments is carefully handled to avoid bankruptcy or is forced upon them by bankruptcy. I think that bankruptcy filings by the lender offers a higher risk of the haircut becoming permanent, relative to temporary declarations of easement throughout the lending chain.