4 ms·
I assume this is to let private corporations hold the government hostage in perpetuity and charge arbitrary amounts of money? Because the government would have
by dataflow 2y ago
I assume this is to let private corporations hold the government hostage in perpetuity and charge arbitrary amounts of money? Because the government would have no leverage in negotiating a lower rent? And if this prevents it from functioning, then even better?
- PaywallBuster 2y agocommercial real estate still recovering from post covid / work from home situation so federal government has plenty of negotiating power also with layoffs the space requirements may have changed and such large buildings may be excessive
- Aurornis 2y ago> commercial real estate still recovering from post covid / work from home situation > so federal government has plenty of negotiating power You have this backward. The government is trying to sell. If real estate is still recovering (aka down) then they don't have much negotiating power. Buyer's market.
- scrose 2y agoOPs point is funnily accurate if you’d like to consider a certain ‘real-estate’ person in government could stand to benefit from the buildings being sold at the lowest price (recovering market) and that same person people will likely be friends with the buyers (lots of negotiating power). They never mentioned whether it’d actually be beneficial for the government. Can’t wait for all of our federal agency buildings to be named after different members of the Trump family once they’ve changed hands! /s
- egberts1 2y agoUmmmm, that's the taxpayers' money.
- PaywallBuster 2y agoI mean negotiating power to acquire/lease new space as they'll likely relocating/downsizing :) keeping a lot of buildings cost a lot of money so even if they're sold at lower than expected prices saves money long term
- rayiner 2y agoWhy would they be able to charge arbitrary amounts of money? The Federal Government owns 37 million square feet of office space in the DC area. Out of 370 million square feet of total office space in the region. According to the article: > A White House official granted anonymity to discuss internal decisions said that the structures GSA plans to offload “all have building repairs that would be cheaper to sell than fix.” I don't know if you're familiar with the commercial real estate market in D.C., but the market has tanked completely. 50-year old buildings (like the Hoover building) are basically worthless and are being torn down.
- miltonlost 2y agoAnd yet there's a Return To Office mandate, and now selling off offices. You're trying to rationalize selling off
- KennyBlanken 2y agoAnyone planning on this might want to consider that particularly after a Supreme Court decision a decade or so ago, the feds can exercise eminent domain for almost trivial reasons. They also might want to consider that the sales could potentially be later determined to have been part of an illegal liquidation of a government agency - or even treason - and find themselves with nothing.
- skissane 2y ago> They also might want to consider that the sales could potentially be later determined to have been part of an illegal liquidation of a government agency - or even treason - and find themselves with nothing. You really think that’s going to happen with the current SCOTUS majority? Even if a lower court ruled that way, you think the Roberts court is going to uphold it? And absent radical schemes like “court packing”, conservatives have got SCOTUS locked up for years, even decades, to come
- Wh1skey 2y ago[dead]