3 ms·

Capitalists constantly sing the song of capitalism as an economic efficiency driver. WFH is economically more efficient for both employer and employee. It does

Capitalists constantly sing the song of capitalism as an economic efficiency driver. WFH is economically more efficient for both employer and employee. It does cause a short term ground-swell as inner city businesses move back to the suburbs, but long term it isn't an increase or decrease, just a reallocation. The same pro-capitalist people are upset by WFH even while being entirely inline with their supposed beliefs, kind of showcasing that it was anti-labor all along. They're happy to benefits businesses, but the fact it may benefit employees even more upsets them greatly. Personally I'm looking forward to more locally owned bodegas and sandwich shops opening near people's WFH homes, maybe so local that some people will even walk to them during lunch and start talking to their neighbors again. We may even see people vote for more pedestrian and cycling infrastructure improvements as they start to use it more.

Nuhhnjnjmimij 4y ago
You criticize capitalism and then look forward to locally owned bodegas and sandwich shops, who by definition are capitalists?
- orwin 4y ago
  I think here it's a historical materialist view on capitalism, so if you work in your shop, it's not capitalism (basically).
- Someone1234 4y ago
  I didn't criticize capitalism. I'm criticizing online commentary.
- pessimizer 4y ago
  The comment was about how WFH is a boon to capitalists, because there are people/pundits who larp as capitalists who ignore productivity gains to bash it. It's just when some people see their religion mentioned, they get triggered.
1123581321 4y ago
I sincerely don’t see the connection between capitalism and anti-WFH. To me, I see it reducing the cost of starting and running a business. It’s also very family-friendly (a lot of entrepreneurs seem to have families, especially older ones.) Is that based on a recent article or study?
Tagbert 4y ago
I think you may be reading too much into pro or con “capitalism” here. I am generally pro capitalist (to a point) but any also pro WFH (in many situations) and don’t see any conflict. It is a complex socio-economic issue and there are benefits and downsides to both office work and WFH. Some businesses oppose WFH but others are embracing it. A lot are experimenting with many trying a hybrid approach of intermittent office work with WFH on other days. Some employees love WFH and would do it all the time but others find something missing or inconvenient about it and would rather work at the office or be able to have a choice about the mix between those options. Whether you get more local engagement of those employees around their home may depend on the neighborhood they live in. Some may get a local convenience store but others may just drive to the closest Safeway.
- orwin 4y ago
  At the bank I'm working at, last year with my coworkers, we decided to guess which managers/execs owned real estate in Paris according to how much they pushed against WFH. We had one outlier, and probably a lot of confounding factors, but the correlation do exist.
phpisthebest 4y ago
>>WFH is economically more efficient for both employer and employee it can be, but it can also be inefficient When done correctly, where the WFH employee has a dedicated place in the home , has set aside dedicated time for working, and has provided the correct technological resources for their home (i.e proper internet) then it is a win win However when the employee instead uses WFH as an excuse to just be "From Home" and focuses on home actives such as child care, home maintenance, or even entertainment or when the employee attempts to use shared spaces (or even as one commenter mentions using a cell phone outside while doing customer service) then it can go very badly my personal experience supporting WFH people is vast, and the number of times I have had to explain to people that your Huges Net Sat internet, or you 3G connection is not really good enough to do a 4K zoom call is not good enough Or the number of screaming kids I have encountered on meetings... or.... to be clearly, I am not anti-WFH. I WFH myself. From a dedicated office in my home with gigabit fiber optic connection but I dont think it is universal good for all employees, nor do I believe it is universal bad, it like most things has alot of gray
- throw827474737 4y ago
  > However when the employee instead uses WFH as an excuse to just be "From Home" and focuses on home actives such as child care, home maintenance, Ah come on, who really does that? Usually people put in extra time. Especially when they unplanned had to suddenly care 2 hours for their child or another emergency, I saw those do that at least the time in the evening, sometimes more. And what if not? In work you have days where lunch suddenly takes much longer, or you had a long but unecessary chat for an hour.. and just worked less time ""super productive"". Sure there are exploiters and lazies.. but know what? They slack in office then too in one or the other way.. And unless they are super destructive its still better to have them at home too, so they do not stick on my desk or distract me from the next cubicle. (But yeah please get rid of them as quick as possible, nothing more demotivating for a team than such guys going long undetected).
- pessimizer 4y ago
  > do a 4K zoom call is not good enough Not doing 4K zoom calls is also a productivity gain.

Nuhhnjnjmimij 4y ago

You criticize capitalism and then look forward to locally owned bodegas and sandwich shops, who by definition are capitalists?

orwin 4y ago
I think here it's a historical materialist view on capitalism, so if you work in your shop, it's not capitalism (basically).
Someone1234 4y ago
I didn't criticize capitalism. I'm criticizing online commentary.
pessimizer 4y ago
The comment was about how WFH is a boon to capitalists, because there are people/pundits who larp as capitalists who ignore productivity gains to bash it. It's just when some people see their religion mentioned, they get triggered.

1123581321 4y ago

I sincerely don’t see the connection between capitalism and anti-WFH. To me, I see it reducing the cost of starting and running a business. It’s also very family-friendly (a lot of entrepreneurs seem to have families, especially older ones.) Is that based on a recent article or study?

Tagbert 4y ago

I think you may be reading too much into pro or con “capitalism” here. I am generally pro capitalist (to a point) but any also pro WFH (in many situations) and don’t see any conflict. It is a complex socio-economic issue and there are benefits and downsides to both office work and WFH. Some businesses oppose WFH but others are embracing it. A lot are experimenting with many trying a hybrid approach of intermittent office work with WFH on other days. Some employees love WFH and would do it all the time but others find something missing or inconvenient about it and would rather work at the office or be able to have a choice about the mix between those options. Whether you get more local engagement of those employees around their home may depend on the neighborhood they live in. Some may get a local convenience store but others may just drive to the closest Safeway.

orwin 4y ago
At the bank I'm working at, last year with my coworkers, we decided to guess which managers/execs owned real estate in Paris according to how much they pushed against WFH. We had one outlier, and probably a lot of confounding factors, but the correlation do exist.

phpisthebest 4y ago

>>WFH is economically more efficient for both employer and employee it can be, but it can also be inefficient When done correctly, where the WFH employee has a dedicated place in the home , has set aside dedicated time for working, and has provided the correct technological resources for their home (i.e proper internet) then it is a win win However when the employee instead uses WFH as an excuse to just be "From Home" and focuses on home actives such as child care, home maintenance, or even entertainment or when the employee attempts to use shared spaces (or even as one commenter mentions using a cell phone outside while doing customer service) then it can go very badly my personal experience supporting WFH people is vast, and the number of times I have had to explain to people that your Huges Net Sat internet, or you 3G connection is not really good enough to do a 4K zoom call is not good enough Or the number of screaming kids I have encountered on meetings... or.... to be clearly, I am not anti-WFH. I WFH myself. From a dedicated office in my home with gigabit fiber optic connection but I dont think it is universal good for all employees, nor do I believe it is universal bad, it like most things has alot of gray

throw827474737 4y ago
> However when the employee instead uses WFH as an excuse to just be "From Home" and focuses on home actives such as child care, home maintenance, Ah come on, who really does that? Usually people put in extra time. Especially when they unplanned had to suddenly care 2 hours for their child or another emergency, I saw those do that at least the time in the evening, sometimes more. And what if not? In work you have days where lunch suddenly takes much longer, or you had a long but unecessary chat for an hour.. and just worked less time ""super productive"". Sure there are exploiters and lazies.. but know what? They slack in office then too in one or the other way.. And unless they are super destructive its still better to have them at home too, so they do not stick on my desk or distract me from the next cubicle. (But yeah please get rid of them as quick as possible, nothing more demotivating for a team than such guys going long undetected).
pessimizer 4y ago
> do a 4K zoom call is not good enough Not doing 4K zoom calls is also a productivity gain.