4 ms·
Legally, doesn't a conspiracy require proof of communication? I think that communication can be indirect or even negative in nature, but it has to be there. But
by galangalalgol 3y ago
Legally, doesn't a conspiracy require proof of communication? I think that communication can be indirect or even negative in nature, but it has to be there. But if everyone that owns commercial real estate has lower margins, that would eventually lower property taxes for such properties, which hurts city revenue. City planners can connect the dots and push for rto, no communication necessary.
- 1attice 3y agoI could be wrong here but I don't read this as a claim of conspiracy. To my mind, this is more a systems-level description of currents in capital. Yes, there's a clickbaity headline about 'elites', but if you think more in terms of wealth doing things of its own accord (similar to how e.g. Dawkins got us talking about selfish genes -- selfish dollars?) then this observation might cash out after all. That said, I do agree that the editorial style of the article is needlessly conspiratorial --- it likely appeals strongly to leftists (like me) who see and sense that capital flows and floes seem to have a mind of their own, but who (unlike me) think this requires smoky backroom deals.
- galangalalgol 3y agoIt would almost be better if it required orchestration. Maximizing profit is an idea, and ideas are bulletproof....
- chaos_emergent 3y agoI’m just confused about causal chain that would lead to this happening…perhaps it’s a lack of imagination. Like, do we think that landlords are bribing corporations to lease their properties?
- sudosysgen 3y agoCorporations are already in 5+ year leases and don't want them to be unmitigated liabilities, the owners of the corporation also have significant investments in real estate, there's your incentive.