5 ms·

Remote Work Won't Save the Heartland

raxxorrax 5y ago
Second article from brookings today with exactly the same topic. Still a ridiculous idea. Are they into real estade or something?
- swiley 5y ago
  >Are they into real estade or something? At this point it's more interesting to ask which companies are not into real estate.
- PaulHoule 5y ago
  There are three principles of public relations: repeating repeating repeating much like the location location location mantra in real estate. For the last 12 years or so there has been some group based in DC which does a round of pushing out the message that "excessive occupational licensing is a problem in America" and they have some good points (e.g. what occupations are licensed in which states seems pretty random; some states license occupation A and say it is critical, other states don't and seem to get along OK) The reality is that a billionaire somewhere has financed a staff to push this message continuously. The problem is that different versions of the same editorial appear over and over again and many people think it is fresh when they see it and they don't have the perspective to realize that there is nothing fresh about it at all, it's just a message that works cumulatively, soaks into the population, and gets continuously improved over time. It's outright exhausting to confront the person who thinks this is fresh with the fact that it's not fresh, but the person who is working with the media to promote this message doesn't get exhausted because: 1. they get paid to do it, and 2. if they get exhausted the person who pulls the strings hires a new one
  - aliasEli 5y ago
    > The problem is that different versions of the same editorial appear over and over again and many people think it is fresh when they see it and they don't have the perspective to realize that there is nothing fresh about it at all, it's just a message that works cumulatively, soaks into the population, and gets continuously improved over time. I find nothing strange in the fact that they keep repeating similar messages. It is a public policy institute after all, and politics generally changes very slowly.
  - aliasEli 5y ago
    >There are three principles of public relations: > repeating > repeating > repeating > much like the > location > location > location > mantra in real estate. My favorite are the three most important things in sales: honesty honesty honesty If you can't fake that you're lost.
- aliasEli 5y ago
  > Still a ridiculous idea. Which idea are you referring to and why is it ridiculous?
  - raxxorrax 5y ago
    The idea that we should live in cities and people should leave living on the land behind. Because it is not in any facility relevant for the fight against climate change and yet, I see fervent defenders of this idea as if it would be the holy grail of sustainability. A cost-/benefit analysis makes clear, that this would give up freedom for marginal success (if there is a benefit, I have my doubts). It would be even more efficient if we all live in tents for that matter. I believe such discussion to be extremely contraproductive to get people to take climate change seriously. Because for sensible action all your capital is exausted. Also your financial capital as it would drive property prices to new heights.
    - aliasEli 5y ago
      The article does not contain the word climate. It focuses on the economic development of the heartland. If am not mistaken this contains some of the poorest places in the US.
      - raxxorrax 5y ago
        This one does not, they spread their arguments far and wide. Reasons aren't important, the meassure is.

Second article from brookings today with exactly the same topic. Still a ridiculous idea. Are they into real estade or something?

swiley 5y ago
>Are they into real estade or something? At this point it's more interesting to ask which companies are not into real estate.
PaulHoule 5y ago
There are three principles of public relations: repeating repeating repeating much like the location location location mantra in real estate. For the last 12 years or so there has been some group based in DC which does a round of pushing out the message that "excessive occupational licensing is a problem in America" and they have some good points (e.g. what occupations are licensed in which states seems pretty random; some states license occupation A and say it is critical, other states don't and seem to get along OK) The reality is that a billionaire somewhere has financed a staff to push this message continuously. The problem is that different versions of the same editorial appear over and over again and many people think it is fresh when they see it and they don't have the perspective to realize that there is nothing fresh about it at all, it's just a message that works cumulatively, soaks into the population, and gets continuously improved over time. It's outright exhausting to confront the person who thinks this is fresh with the fact that it's not fresh, but the person who is working with the media to promote this message doesn't get exhausted because: 1. they get paid to do it, and 2. if they get exhausted the person who pulls the strings hires a new one
- aliasEli 5y ago
  > The problem is that different versions of the same editorial appear over and over again and many people think it is fresh when they see it and they don't have the perspective to realize that there is nothing fresh about it at all, it's just a message that works cumulatively, soaks into the population, and gets continuously improved over time. I find nothing strange in the fact that they keep repeating similar messages. It is a public policy institute after all, and politics generally changes very slowly.
- aliasEli 5y ago
  >There are three principles of public relations: > repeating > repeating > repeating > much like the > location > location > location > mantra in real estate. My favorite are the three most important things in sales: honesty honesty honesty If you can't fake that you're lost.
aliasEli 5y ago
> Still a ridiculous idea. Which idea are you referring to and why is it ridiculous?
- raxxorrax 5y ago
  The idea that we should live in cities and people should leave living on the land behind. Because it is not in any facility relevant for the fight against climate change and yet, I see fervent defenders of this idea as if it would be the holy grail of sustainability. A cost-/benefit analysis makes clear, that this would give up freedom for marginal success (if there is a benefit, I have my doubts). It would be even more efficient if we all live in tents for that matter. I believe such discussion to be extremely contraproductive to get people to take climate change seriously. Because for sensible action all your capital is exausted. Also your financial capital as it would drive property prices to new heights.
  - aliasEli 5y ago
    The article does not contain the word climate. It focuses on the economic development of the heartland. If am not mistaken this contains some of the poorest places in the US.
    - raxxorrax 5y ago
      This one does not, they spread their arguments far and wide. Reasons aren't important, the meassure is.