As has been explained several times on this forum, for most people who ever want to own something nice in game, a lending system would be very bad. Items would be bought up by the wealthy for renting. There is no way a lending system could not be used as a renting system (also already demonstrated several times). You may think it would be great to borrow your friends nice item, but in reality your friend's item would be bought out by a wealthy renter, or he would be too tempted to rent it out himself rather than lend it out for free.
My thought here is that this isn't too different to RL property, yet it doesn't stop RL property markets being dynamic and vibrant, and a great place to trade, invest, and find value.
Imagine there was a law passed irl that no new houses could be built. The most wealthy would then buy up all the houses and rent them. The price for the houses would go far above what a normal person could pay. Thus most people would never own a house, they'd be rental slaves their entire lives. Sounds good?
I think there's a substantial difference between various countries around the world (Australia vs Germany from personal experience, and America different again from hearsay), in both the availability and affordability of property. My understanding is that the availability and affordability influence the ratio of renters to owners. It seems that property markets can function with both high and low proportions of as you say, "the wealthy" being owners.
I'm interested then in why allowing such commerce would be a bad thing. RL experience seems to me to show the opposite to be the case.
I reckon if it were possible to rent shop deeds for example (along with, of course, a proper secure interface for the landlord and tenant to come to an agreement on terms), it would overall be a good thing. It allows people to try before they buy. It allows people who don't have the capital to get started. It allows a new type of business to emerge (renting). It would stimulate the cycling of money through the economy. It would allow people in different countries to each other to do business without needing to hope they give the deed back.
When you say items would be bought up by a wealthy renter, I agree, and I see that this is the case with RL property. I guess my question is, what's so bad about this (given that we are operating in a RCE here, and capitalism is fundamental to its survival and growth)? Is the problem that you think some items would move out of the reach of ownership of most people? If that's the issue, here's a thought:
Thinking about non-rentable items in game that are expensive, the problem exists anyway. Renting them out would actually give access to the average non-wealthy person. It might make ownership further from reach, but it makes ACCESS further within reach. Rental markets don't necessarily mean that the wealthy rip off their customers either - in fact, price competition would likely stop that.
I'm not convinced overall that it would be a bad thing, so would love to read further debates about it. What do you suggest I search for if I want to read about where it's been said before that this would be a bad thing? Any particular threads you're aware of?
(and already have the code needed, for this 
