If landlords can’t pay back loans on office buildings, the lenders will suffer. Some banks are trying to avoid that fate.

If landlords can’t pay back loans on office buildings, the lenders will suffer. Some banks are trying to avoid that fate.

Hard times are likely ahead for a lot of people. Mind your expenses and plan to save where possible just in case. Apologies for having a doomer outlook; I’m very cynical about capitalism, especially in the USA.

      • blusterydayve26@midwest.socialEnglish
        0·
        2 days ago

        Nah, it’s a repost from late 2007.

        Sorry, I mean a repeat of late 2007, the fourth or fifth “once in a lifetime economic crisis” for millennials that will somehow magically end with billionaires owning an even larger percentage of the GDP.

        “How could this possibly happen, again, again, again, again,” will cry the economists billionaire simps.

          • Glytch@lemmy.world
            0·
            2 days ago

            They’re just pointing out that history is repeating itself because we learned nothing from 2008

            • LilDumpy@lemmy.worldEnglish
              0·
              2 days ago

              My bad, I should have put a “/s” on all my comments in this thread.

              Those lines are directly out of a movie. Except they say rerun instead of repost. It just seemed that the OP was driving one of these:

              Image

      • Asafum@feddit.nl
        0·
        2 days ago

        Isn’t this just going to be “great recession 2 office building bugaloo?”

        Part 1 was the great recession caused by sub prime loaning assholes and combined debt packages.

        Similar story different players apparently…

  • Zess@lemmy.world
    0·
    3 days ago

    Same reason why banks kept giving loans to Trump. He had so much debt that their best option for a long time was to just give him more money in the hopes he could use it to earn enough to repay all the loans. Sunk-cost fallacy at the major financial level.

    • Asafum@feddit.nl
      0·
      2 days ago

      “if you owe the bank $100 that’s your problem, if you owe the bank $932,514,634 that’s their problem.”

  • Etterra@lemmy.world
    0·
    3 days ago

    What’s that? Rich fuckers are worried about being less rich? However will I be able to sleep at night.

  • werefreeatlast@lemmy.world
    0·
    3 days ago

    The churn will continue…you become a high paid employee at 50, the new kids get paid 10% below you because you’re “senior”. Then you all get 3% increases. You get retired. They keep getting 3% increases while you don’t. Suddenly they get paid more than you. You start having trouble paying for stuff because it’s so expensive. Then suddenly you gotta sell your house to have enough. A newly graduated kid gets paid the same as you, they buy your house. You can’t buy a house anymore, so you move to a cheaper area where you can afford something. Then you moved again and again. Take on stamp collecting as a cheap affordable hobby. Blah blah. You end up in a retirement home. Then your kids can’t afford that. Next thing you know you’re under a bridge and you love the freedom for like 3 days. Then you really wanna shower but you can’t. The welfare office is far from the YMCA, so you find a Walmart cart. A guy shows you where to collect soda cans and where to sell them. You two become friends but he OD’s… you inherit his cart. Then you help a new guy to find cans with you. So then you OD. And the guy in your house is retiring…the cycle continues.

  • Metz@lemmy.worldEnglish
    0·
    3 days ago

    Mind your expenses and plan to save where possible just in case

    So… like always? Nothing changed. We are already fucked.

        • tb_@lemmy.world
          0·
          2 days ago

          I’m saying that the banks, who appear to be struggling, would like you to save your money by putting it in their system. So they may use it.

          I’m not making any other judgement.

          That said, no clue where the person I replied to got their apparent quote from, as it does not appear in the article itself.

  • Treczoks@lemmy.world
    0·
    4 days ago

    The big question is : Whereto are they dumping toxic loans? I would not put it pst some assholes to sell such “products” off to unassuming private shareholders as a “wonderful investement in business property” for their retirement…

    • r0ertel@lemmy.world
      0·
      2 days ago

      I was wondering this same thing. Who would take on a loan that a bank deems unprofitable? Is this like turning the loan over to a loan shark and the shark has means to ensure payment that banks don’t due to regulations? Are they selling to the govn’t? Either option is not good.

      • Asafum@feddit.nl
        0·
        2 days ago

        Oh they don’t need to do that, we’ve already determined that some companies don’t have to suffer the consequences of their own actions because they’re “tOo BiG tO fAiL” so society has to suffer the consequences.

        Just remember: when they win, they win. When they lose we lose and they still win.

        Our form of capitalism is a fucking joke. Socialism for the wealthy owners and rugged individualism for the poors.

        • Bytemeister@lemmy.worldΕλληνικά
          0·
          2 days ago

          Yep. Biggest disappointment about the 2008 crisis was that all the people who caused it were able to go back to work and start doing it all over again

          I say, if you crash the global economy, you ought to be relegated to fast food service for the rest of your life.

      • BeMoreCareful@lemmy.worldEnglish
        0·
        3 days ago

        I mean, it’s proven financial strategy. Money is just a number to rich people and if you need more the government will just give it to you.