• reddwarf
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    11 months ago

    Some collect rent from sub companies, some have fears of devaluation of buildings if not occupied, etc. Plenty of angles where the lost money.

    • prole@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      edit-2
      11 months ago

      Right, theoretical money. “Opportunity cost.” They’re not losing anything, they’re missing out on potentially making more.

      Boo hoo

      • reddwarf
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        11 months ago

        Hey, I agree. It is about corrupt officials and businesses who want to make more. I’m not burning a candle for the (perceived) plight of these monsters 😀

    • new_acct_who_dis@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      10 months ago

      There’s gotta be pressure for offices to open up so employees are forced to spend money on food/coffee/dry cleaning/whatever around the building itself too.

      I feel for those businesses, but not enough to subsidize their existence when I don’t need it.

      • reddwarf
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        10 months ago

        Spot on. It is so much more than just ‘already owned a building’. There was an industry created around offices, inside and out. Powers that be (corrupt and otherwise) wanted to keep the gravy train going and so order people back to offices. Does it make sense for people to do so? Largely not I think bit screw the people right? Despicable.