Recent searches
Search options
Part of the problem is that there is no pain for landlords that have empty storefronts.
If I told you to take $5 out of your pocket and put it in a drawer, and wait an undetermined amount of time, (maybe 1 month, maybe 3 months, maybe 6 months, maybe a year, but eventually, that $5 turns into 1 million dollars), you might do it! You won't miss that $5. But you want the million.
Alternatively, you could put that $5 in your checking account and earn 2% a year on it.
@mekkaokereke@hachyderm.ioMissing out on that rent doesn't change the landlord's lives in any way in many cases. They're willing to just sit on the vacant.
Some cities handle this by charging landlords a fee for having vacant storefronts. Some people think this is mean to landlords! But really, it's just changing the landlords' calculus. 
Those cities want fewer vacant storefronts, so they make it more profitable to have a lower paying tenant than a vacant.
The other part of the problem is that it's ridiculously expensive to open a new business in San Francisco, and there is no foot traffic.
People spent all this time pretending that SF businesses were run out of business by Black shoplifters. But the reality is that SF is so expensive to live in, that it doesn't have enough residents to support those local businesses.
The same local government that makes it hard to open businesses, blocks new apartments.
@mekkaokereke @Jackiemauro @sanae cool! Thanks to all who participated !