Originally Posted by jfman (Post 36042310)

The properties already exist nomad.

How do people afford homes? Loans.

Same principles apply without the need for parasite landlords.

Originally Posted by OLD BOY (Post 36042470)

Parasite landlords? You really do have an attitude problem, jfman.

If it was as easy as you suggest for small businesses to own their own properties instead of renting, doesn't it make you wonder why they are not doing it?

Originally Posted by OLD BOY (Post 36042470)

Parasite landlords? You really do have an attitude problem, jfman.

If it was as easy as you suggest for small businesses to own their own properties instead of renting, doesn't it make you wonder why they are not doing it?

Originally Posted by Sephiroth (Post 36042471)

Originally Posted by nomadking (Post 36042474)

"Capital alone"?:confused: They're providing a building and a whole host of other services. Who pays for the car parking spaces? The "capital alone" really applies to lenders. If they didn't exist, then people couldn't start up businesses, buy their homes, buy their business locations, etc. How else do the shopping centres get built in the first place.:rolleyes:

Originally Posted by jfman (Post 36042472)

It's not an attitude problem - it's reality.

It's extracting money from capital alone - it doesn't generate anything 'new' for the economy other than returns for the investors.

Of course it isn't easy for small businesses to own their own property - the price of said property is being driven up by the parasite landlords! It makes it more challenging, and less rewarding, for those great entrepreneurs you frequently tell us all about. Surely you, of all people on this forum, would think that's a bad thing?

---------- Post added at 20:28 ---------- Previous post was at 20:27 ----------



I'm not absolutist about it. :)

Originally Posted by jfman (Post 36042476)

You're using the narrow example of a new development shopping centre. Most High Streets aren't new developments, they are formed of existing properties that have stood for decades snapped up by speculative investors getting a higher return from rental than investing in shares.

A devaluation of property prices, and rental incomes, would be most welcome for the sector. That'd allow businesses (that employ local people) to flourish. A net positive.

Originally Posted by Sephiroth (Post 36041336)

Originally Posted by Chris (Post 36041339)

Ah yes I was forgetting Watford - formerly known as the Harlequin Centre back when I lived in that neck of the woods. There’s a John Lewis in the Watford site and as you say, it’s attached to the high street. It’ll be fine.

Originally Posted by Chris (Post 36042941)

So John Lewis will not reopen eight of its stores ... including the one in Watford. That's quite a surprise to me, though nationally I suspect their decision to shut down Birmingham permanently is the bigger shock. If John Lewis can't turn a profit in the UK's second city, what next?

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-53348519

Originally Posted by 1andrew1 (Post 36042947)

I think the issue with Birmingham may be the competition from Selfridges there. In some cities like Liverpool, John Lewis is the last department store remaining so can turn a profit.

Originally Posted by Sephiroth (Post 36042981)

Originally Posted by Hom3r (Post 36043219)

I can see facemasks becoming more common in the coming months and years.

Much in the same way as some Asian countries, where it is common practice.

Originally Posted by jfman (Post 36042472)

It's not an attitude problem - it's reality.

Originally Posted by OLD BOY (Post 36043453)

I'm glad I don't live in your 'reality', jfman.

So you are saying that if I own a building that I am renting out as a shop, some geezer can just take it off me because you say I am not contributing anything as 'it's just a property'.

That's not how it works in my reality, and I'm absolutely certain that I live in the real world. You come out with the craziest things.