4 ms·

It's a class thing too. I grew up poor, but had the good fortune of getting a computer back in 1978. I have had a mix of manual labor and office jobs over the y

by eggy 3y ago

It's a class thing too. I grew up poor, but had the good fortune of getting a computer back in 1978. I have had a mix of manual labor and office jobs over the years, and obviously you can't WFH if your job is diving and fixing underwater hydraulics and electrical systems or machining parts for a space mission. I've done both. I think getting out of the house to a place of mutual effort will always be required and has societal benefits and individual benefits to those who would typically shy away from face-to-face interactions. I guess if your work product is moving electrons and information you can work where you want. I worked in the middle of nowhere a few times for years. I guess that's why I need to have physical work along with my mental work. Being on a phone or laptop in a jungle or beach paradise takes away from my presence there. At least that's my opinion.

randomdata 3y ago
> obviously you can't WFH if your job is [...] machining parts for a space mission. Machining as a general practice is quite well suited to working from home. Living in an agricultural community, which as an industry demands a fair amount of machining services, I have several neighbours who make their living as machinists working from home.
- Robotbeat 3y ago
  But not for a space mission which requires careful tracking, metrology, and controls. And is by default restricted by ITAR/EAR and possibly classified.
  - randomdata 3y ago
    But as a general practice...
    - eggy 3y ago
      I was born and raised in Brooklyn, so that wasn't my situation. I was a welder for a company in NYC making animated displays in the mid-90s. I took the subway. I would read, think about work, observe people, etc. No phones and internet then, so sometimes talking to fellow passengers.
- eggy 3y ago
  Sure living in an agricultural community. Land, house, and a shop is great. I had my own shop 11 miles from home that was about a 20 min drive to sort my head about the work for the day and miscellaneous thoughts - me time - not driving like a zombie.
jordanpg 3y ago
> obviously you can't WFH if your job is... I think this part of the problem deserves a lot more attention. There is a social contract aspect to employment and that only works when all the players think things are fair. It simply cannot be good for the health of the economy if lots of important jobs are undesirable because they can't be done remotely and, meanwhile, the remote workers are sitting on the beach. I suppose the invisible hand can correct for this to some extent but I think WFH and work-life balance is probably more valuable to most than higher salary.
- randomdata 3y ago
  As far as I can see, the jobs that have easily transitioned to WFH were also the jobs that everyone already envied even when they were most commonly practiced in an office. If roles were reversed, maybe a programmer would quit to go flip burgers in order to be at home, but would a burger flipper quit to program at home where they otherwise would not quit to program in an office? I suspect if the burger flipper had an inclination towards programming, they would quit to become one either way. So the social contract may not be impacted all that much.
- danaris 3y ago
  I think this is assuming two things that are not in evidence: 1) Most people want to work from home, enough that they would feel significant envy of those who do even if their own job is one that cannot logistically do that (eg, plumber). 2) The people working from home are doing so in such opulent luxury that it creates more envy on top of that. ("...sitting on the beach") It's quite plain from this forum alone—a forum which is heavily skewed toward knowledge workers of various types, and especially computer programmers, a job which, in terms of its basic requirements, can unquestionably be done from home—that if #1 is true, it is not by a vast margin. Many people clearly like going into the office. Many people with jobs involving in-person manual labor clearly love their jobs. I think that the kind of "fairness" you mention in your second line is, indeed, very important—but I think that it's more about "you could be letting me do XYZ, like they are, but you're preventing me for arbitrary or selfish reasons," not "they're doing XYZ, but due to something fundamental about my circumstances, that's impossible for me." That is to say, it's more important for everyone whose job can be reasonably made remote to have the option to do so, than for every job in the world to have that option, including the ones where it's physically impossible. People are generally pretty good at understanding the inherent tradeoffs in such things, especially when they come to them after the initial transition has taken place and make an informed choice (obviously there's going to be more friction in the transition time—I don't think that's avoidable). In short, I don't think there's more to worry about here than the already-existing (and likely permanent, at least until we get true UBI or something) state of things, that some people who have fewer options in the career they can choose to go into feel resentful of those who have more such options.

by eggy 3y ago

randomdata 3y ago

> obviously you can't WFH if your job is [...] machining parts for a space mission. Machining as a general practice is quite well suited to working from home. Living in an agricultural community, which as an industry demands a fair amount of machining services, I have several neighbours who make their living as machinists working from home.

Robotbeat 3y ago
But not for a space mission which requires careful tracking, metrology, and controls. And is by default restricted by ITAR/EAR and possibly classified.
- randomdata 3y ago
  But as a general practice...
  - eggy 3y ago
    I was born and raised in Brooklyn, so that wasn't my situation. I was a welder for a company in NYC making animated displays in the mid-90s. I took the subway. I would read, think about work, observe people, etc. No phones and internet then, so sometimes talking to fellow passengers.
eggy 3y ago
Sure living in an agricultural community. Land, house, and a shop is great. I had my own shop 11 miles from home that was about a 20 min drive to sort my head about the work for the day and miscellaneous thoughts - me time - not driving like a zombie.

jordanpg 3y ago

> obviously you can't WFH if your job is... I think this part of the problem deserves a lot more attention. There is a social contract aspect to employment and that only works when all the players think things are fair. It simply cannot be good for the health of the economy if lots of important jobs are undesirable because they can't be done remotely and, meanwhile, the remote workers are sitting on the beach. I suppose the invisible hand can correct for this to some extent but I think WFH and work-life balance is probably more valuable to most than higher salary.

randomdata 3y ago
As far as I can see, the jobs that have easily transitioned to WFH were also the jobs that everyone already envied even when they were most commonly practiced in an office. If roles were reversed, maybe a programmer would quit to go flip burgers in order to be at home, but would a burger flipper quit to program at home where they otherwise would not quit to program in an office? I suspect if the burger flipper had an inclination towards programming, they would quit to become one either way. So the social contract may not be impacted all that much.
danaris 3y ago
I think this is assuming two things that are not in evidence: 1) Most people want to work from home, enough that they would feel significant envy of those who do even if their own job is one that cannot logistically do that (eg, plumber). 2) The people working from home are doing so in such opulent luxury that it creates more envy on top of that. ("...sitting on the beach") It's quite plain from this forum alone—a forum which is heavily skewed toward knowledge workers of various types, and especially computer programmers, a job which, in terms of its basic requirements, can unquestionably be done from home—that if #1 is true, it is not by a vast margin. Many people clearly like going into the office. Many people with jobs involving in-person manual labor clearly love their jobs. I think that the kind of "fairness" you mention in your second line is, indeed, very important—but I think that it's more about "you could be letting me do XYZ, like they are, but you're preventing me for arbitrary or selfish reasons," not "they're doing XYZ, but due to something fundamental about my circumstances, that's impossible for me." That is to say, it's more important for everyone whose job can be reasonably made remote to have the option to do so, than for every job in the world to have that option, including the ones where it's physically impossible. People are generally pretty good at understanding the inherent tradeoffs in such things, especially when they come to them after the initial transition has taken place and make an informed choice (obviously there's going to be more friction in the transition time—I don't think that's avoidable). In short, I don't think there's more to worry about here than the already-existing (and likely permanent, at least until we get true UBI or something) state of things, that some people who have fewer options in the career they can choose to go into feel resentful of those who have more such options.