4 ms·
There is going to be a lot of pain but overall I think this is very good for the economy. Rents that went to landlords will be redirected to more productive pur
by lquist 6y ago
There is going to be a lot of pain but overall I think this is very good for the economy. Rents that went to landlords will be redirected to more productive purposes (or profit, which when distributed to shareholders will be reinvested).
- cobookman 6y agoWouldn't rents just shift from cities to suburbs, offices to homes/banks.
- ghaff 6y agoTo some degree. Some people will choose to upgrade their home space--albeit often in less dense locations--but if utilization increases that's generally a win overall.
- albacur 6y agoAt least in San Francisco Bay Area, which has one of the worst housing markets in the country, it would be a net win. For some people who've lived here a while and bought a house for cheap or have rent control, they're making money hand over fist. But for the rest of us, a huge portion of our paychecks goes to landlords or paying a mortgage. It would be much more reasonable in almost any other US suburb and most US cities.
- mrfusion 6y agoTechnically the rents should go to the employees now devoting parts of their homes (and utilities) to work.
- pan69 6y agoFirst we started bringing our own laptops, now we're bringing our office. Sure, there are lots of people who are getting issued a laptop from their employer but there are also a lot of people that don't.
- myself248 6y agoI got an email from my electric utility this summer, pointing out that I was using MASSIVELY more electricity than the same month last year. Like, roughly triple. When I was at work every day, I had my HVAC on a pretty drastic setback; no sense cooling an empty house. I guess it worked pretty well! Because this year I was home all summer and despite not wearing pants most of the time, it still took a fair bit of power to keep things not-sweaty.
- neverartful 6y agoYou're right, but I wouldn't hold my breath.