5 ms·

LOL. Once a worker has demonstrated job mastery online and has also shown he can communicate by zoomery etc, it is just an exercise in control by force - slaver

LOL. Once a worker has demonstrated job mastery online and has also shown he can communicate by zoomery etc, it is just an exercise in control by force - slavery by another name. Some bosses are bullies and have optimised their employee oppression, browbeating, etc on a face to face basis and in office packs where the well know 'pecking order' hierarchy can hold sway. These guys are fish out of water, peckers with no 'peckees'. These people yearn for the control of old - which is gone forever. Managers who insist, like this thinly veiled urge to move the workers back under control to save the restaurants and empty parking lots and other shops, I feel is doomed to partial failure. Some will come back, some will not, some will quiet to avoid coming back - SF will adapt, office rents will lower, as will house prices and vacancy rates will inch up.

bombcar 5y ago
Or worse, people will wake up and realize that being in SF isn’t necessary, and then it’ll start to dry up entirely. If the office you never go to is in Austin instead of SF, who will care?
- iancmceachern 5y ago
  I would much rather live in SF than Austin. There are plenty of people who chose to live in SF not for work, but because it's an awesome city. Not everyone bases their entire life around work, and the perception of what it will or won't allow. Just choose where and how you want to live, then find a job that supports that. Not the other way around.
  - mrDmrTmrJ 5y ago
    But the challenge is that SF finances are built on the assumption of a lot of office workers and a growing tax base. And if you upend either of these assumptions, then managing the city (with a lot of present challenges) becomes a lot harder.
    - aurizon 5y ago
      Yes, New York City is also begging corporate heads to force people to start to commute again. Once large numbers of people as well as offices have witnessed the savings and happiness that ensue from remote work they will balk. Many offices have already exited and signed cheaper leases at new digs, others have had lease terms renegotiated on a smaller footprint(often with a termination payment demanded) - the landlords have a weakened hand. Others just moved to new cheaper spaces when obdurate landlords blinked - and they were gone.
    - iancmceachern 5y ago
      Agreed, but this problem is not unique to SF as compared to other major cities like NYC, etc. Therefore it shouldn't be a decoding factor in where to live, because it exists in each option.
    - bombcar 5y ago
      This provides a perverse incentive for cities like SF to not work to allow efficient high-speed rail commutes into them, as it would harm their tax base ... Annoying.
  - bombcar 5y ago
    Exactly! Those who love the city should be glad to see those who don’t want to be there find a way to escape.
  - more_corn 5y ago
    SF is also a really shitty city. Parking is impossible, public transit is a nightmare, traffic everywhere at all times, useless street cleaning (it exists solely to force people to move their cars and it probably doubles the amount of particulate pollution in the air). You literally have to discover some trick to go to any of the events in the city (what’s your strategy for bay to breakers?), taxes and cost of living are sky high. Housing prices are insane so people with normal jobs like grocery clerk, teacher, bus driver can’t afford to live in the city (which increases traffic again) Don’t get me wrong, there are good things, but there are also plenty of reasons to leave. Not having to be here for work is a blessing. Maybe if everyone who can leave does, there’ll be a bit of room for every who’s left.
    - mint2 5y ago
      Since you have a very negative view of sf, Perhaps you should move out. You seem to dislike the city so much and also criticize housing prices which are sky high due to more people living here than there is housing. You could help solve that issue and at the same time stop living a place you dislike by moving if you haven’t yet. As the negative views expressed are your opinions, I’m not going to correct some disjoint logic.
    - iancmceachern 5y ago
      These are all things that apply to every major city. SF is no different. When comparing places to live it's important to focus on the differences between the options, what makes each place unique. Not negative truisms about the world. I've lived in Denver, NYC (both Manhatten, Yonkers and Brooklyn), NJ, Sacramento, and traveled extensively around the world. SF is not unique in facing these problems. It is unique in the weather, public spaces and parks (including the world class federal amd state parks within half a days drive), incredible shorelines, culture, history, on and on. Those are what I focus on when choosing where to live. Not the fact that parking will be hard, parking is hard in every city.
      - tanseydavid 5y ago
        >> These are all things that apply to every major city. SF is no different. 7 square miles. Water on 3 sides.

bombcar 5y ago

Or worse, people will wake up and realize that being in SF isn’t necessary, and then it’ll start to dry up entirely. If the office you never go to is in Austin instead of SF, who will care?

iancmceachern 5y ago
I would much rather live in SF than Austin. There are plenty of people who chose to live in SF not for work, but because it's an awesome city. Not everyone bases their entire life around work, and the perception of what it will or won't allow. Just choose where and how you want to live, then find a job that supports that. Not the other way around.
- mrDmrTmrJ 5y ago
  But the challenge is that SF finances are built on the assumption of a lot of office workers and a growing tax base. And if you upend either of these assumptions, then managing the city (with a lot of present challenges) becomes a lot harder.
  - aurizon 5y ago
    Yes, New York City is also begging corporate heads to force people to start to commute again. Once large numbers of people as well as offices have witnessed the savings and happiness that ensue from remote work they will balk. Many offices have already exited and signed cheaper leases at new digs, others have had lease terms renegotiated on a smaller footprint(often with a termination payment demanded) - the landlords have a weakened hand. Others just moved to new cheaper spaces when obdurate landlords blinked - and they were gone.
  - iancmceachern 5y ago
    Agreed, but this problem is not unique to SF as compared to other major cities like NYC, etc. Therefore it shouldn't be a decoding factor in where to live, because it exists in each option.
  - bombcar 5y ago
    This provides a perverse incentive for cities like SF to not work to allow efficient high-speed rail commutes into them, as it would harm their tax base ... Annoying.
- bombcar 5y ago
  Exactly! Those who love the city should be glad to see those who don’t want to be there find a way to escape.
- more_corn 5y ago
  SF is also a really shitty city. Parking is impossible, public transit is a nightmare, traffic everywhere at all times, useless street cleaning (it exists solely to force people to move their cars and it probably doubles the amount of particulate pollution in the air). You literally have to discover some trick to go to any of the events in the city (what’s your strategy for bay to breakers?), taxes and cost of living are sky high. Housing prices are insane so people with normal jobs like grocery clerk, teacher, bus driver can’t afford to live in the city (which increases traffic again) Don’t get me wrong, there are good things, but there are also plenty of reasons to leave. Not having to be here for work is a blessing. Maybe if everyone who can leave does, there’ll be a bit of room for every who’s left.
  - mint2 5y ago
    Since you have a very negative view of sf, Perhaps you should move out. You seem to dislike the city so much and also criticize housing prices which are sky high due to more people living here than there is housing. You could help solve that issue and at the same time stop living a place you dislike by moving if you haven’t yet. As the negative views expressed are your opinions, I’m not going to correct some disjoint logic.
  - iancmceachern 5y ago
    These are all things that apply to every major city. SF is no different. When comparing places to live it's important to focus on the differences between the options, what makes each place unique. Not negative truisms about the world. I've lived in Denver, NYC (both Manhatten, Yonkers and Brooklyn), NJ, Sacramento, and traveled extensively around the world. SF is not unique in facing these problems. It is unique in the weather, public spaces and parks (including the world class federal amd state parks within half a days drive), incredible shorelines, culture, history, on and on. Those are what I focus on when choosing where to live. Not the fact that parking will be hard, parking is hard in every city.
    - tanseydavid 5y ago
      >> These are all things that apply to every major city. SF is no different. 7 square miles. Water on 3 sides.