# The Workings of the City that Works

**URL:** <https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-workings-of-the-city-that-works/616921>\
**Category:** Factual Questions\
**Created:** [March 27, 2012, 2:51am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-workings-of-the-city-that-works/616921 "2012-03-27T02:51:25Z")\
**Posts on this page:** 1\
**Showing post:** 6

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Uncle\_Goat](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/u/8e8cbc/32.png) [@Uncle\_Goat](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Uncle_Goat)\
**Post date:** [March 28, 2012, 2:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-workings-of-the-city-that-works/616921/6 "2012-03-28T14:00:57Z")

</div>

> [@Small Atomic Bomb ?](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/small-atomic-bomb/4864/2):
>
> 1. Nope. Sometimes real estate is held for long-term speculation, or in expectation of an impending redevelopment. Sometimes it’s tied up in family problems, multiple ownership, or probate issues.

While one can sympathize with prolonged legal battles, the greater good of the community must be taken into account. Vacant store fronts are not positive assets and one of the ways to help a local economy is have a thriving business where once there was nothing. The long-term speculation should be focused on taking some risks with a potential business, not wait for someone else to take that risk so you can lure yet another Starbucks in.

> [@Small Atomic Bomb ?](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/small-atomic-bomb/4864/2):
>
> 1. Nope. The whole building isn’t vacant, much less abandoned, just one portion. There are ways for the city to condemn areas for redevelopment, but it has to be a comprehensive plan, not just a vendetta against one storefront.

Hopefully no one is talking about vendettas against anyone. If there aren’t tax breaks for empty store fronts, perhaps there should be for active ones. And this tax break could also be translated to lower rent cost for a possible business too.  
Various carrot and stick solutions have to be out there, perhaps a larger carrot is the answer.

> [@Small Atomic Bomb ?](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/small-atomic-bomb/4864/2):
>
> 1. Want to look at the statistical averages on which kind of tenants are most likely to fail: undercapitalized locals or national chains? There’s a reason the real estate industry calls them “national credit retailers.” Because they have credit.

This is a false equivalency. Statistical evidence shows that most small businesses fail within five years, (sooner if the business is a restaurant), so why bother? Why not board up the windows and forever padlock the door? But clearly, that is not the desired solution.

National chains, in the “too big to fail” belief system, are failing all the time, often with greater impact as their arrival can force smaller independent stores under before they decide to pull up stakes and go elsewhere. A national chain has no invested interest in staying in a community through thick and thin. Sears can proudly take a huge bribe to stay in Illinois and still turn around and start closing stores because it serves their bottom line.

Worrying about maximizing profits for shareholders is not something we need in a local community store. Ideally, the person who runs the store also lives in the neighborhood. The owner hires local people and it is a supported by the local community. Not every business needs to be a millionaire making deal. Not every store needs to have a nationally recognizable image or brand to be successful.

I would much rather see a local guy have a coffee house that featured local folk musicians than another Starbucks, and I don’t drink coffee and hate folk music.  
The community should be actively thriving, not clearly dying. I would rather see a store front change hands once a year from one bad idea to the next than to see it empty and devoid of any promise.

---

_[View the full topic](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-workings-of-the-city-that-works/616921)._