5 ms·
Wow. Talk about perverse incentives!
by Mengkudulangsat 2y ago
Wow. Talk about perverse incentives!
- bongodongobob 2y agoWhat is perverse?
- fuzzfactor 2y agoWhat is incentive? Asking for a friend, an Amazon employee . . .
- Terr_ 2y agoThe wasteful inefficiencies of unnecessary commuting?
- bongodongobob 2y agoWho said anything about commuting?
- Terr_ 2y ago> What is perverse? > Who said anything about commuting? Commuting is implicit in any RTO discussion and it's also been explicitly mentioned in parent comments, so both of these "questions" of yours are starting to look like bad-faith trolling.
- bongodongobob 2y agoI guess I'm not assuming that all of these people live far away. If it's RTO, my assumption is they used to live close. If they moved, I guess that's a different story.
- ehnto 2y agoIt's controversial because not all workers want to return to office. If the only reason they are returning to office is for tax cuts to Amazon corp, that's perverse. Not unprecedented, probably the norm prior 2019. But perverse anyway. In a scenario not perverted by tax incentives, you would do what's best for individual worker's happiness and productivity. Some would stay WFH, some would return to office, probably a lot of hybrid situations. But very unlikely would it be mass return to office.
- bongodongobob 2y agoThe city wants people to live there and put money into the economy. I don't see what's wrong with that. Cities need people to live in them and spend money there.
- JohnFen 2y agoCoercing people to live and work there is, at the very least, extremely objectionable. If a city can't get people who actually want to be there, perhaps there is a deeper issue that should be addressed.
- marssaxman 2y agoSeattle has no problem at all attracting people who actually want to be here! Quite the opposite: building enough new housing space for all the people trying to move here has been one of our more significant problems for many years now.
- ehnto 2y agoI don't think it's about housing in the metro and inner metro, I think it's about commercial real estate and businesses in the CBD areas and business parks. People definitely want to live in the city areas still for the lifestyle, but not everyone can live there so most still commute. Commuting sucks, people don't want a commute. But without commuting, the amount of business (and thus rent, thus tax income) that a CBD can support is much smaller. Better public transport would help reducing the pain and cost of commuting, maybe that helps the CBD areas bring more people in.
- bongodongobob 2y agoI mean, I guess that's an opinion if you have no idea how cities work.
- spacemadness 2y agoI think that’s a red herring. People would rather be told the reasoning directly for something that affects their lives instead of a bunch of executives spinning a tale that makes them look benevolent.