Americans Begin Returning to Cities After Remote-Work Exodus, Data Shows (msn.com) 194
An anonymous reader shares this report from the Washington Post:
The exodus of people fleeing large urban areas during the height of the pandemic appears to be reversing, according to data from the Census Bureau released Thursday. Many workers who could telecommute abandoned crowded cities and counties for suburban or rural areas when covid struck, causing demographers and businesses to wonder whether the movement signified a permanent shift. But the overall patterns of population change are moving toward pre-pandemic rates, the bureau's Vintage 2022 estimates of population and components of change show.
Eleven of the 15 largest metro areas gained residents or lost fewer people compared with the previous year, including the D.C. metro area, New York City, the San Francisco Bay Area, and Seattle, according to an analysis by Brookings Institution senior demographer William Frey.... Among the most striking recorded shifts were in Manhattan and San Francisco, both of which lost population at a significant rate between 2020 and 2021. Manhattan, which shrank by 5.87 percent in 2021, grew by 1.11 percent last year. San Francisco lost 6.79 percent of its population in 2021 but shrank by only a third of a percentage point last year. Both are home to a large number of people who were able to work remotely during the pandemic. Covid rates in New York City were especially high early in the pandemic, and many Manhattan residents moved to outlying counties....
"Many counties with large universities saw their populations fully rebound this year as students returned," said Christine Hartley, assistant division chief for estimates and projections in the Census Bureau's population division.
The article also makes the point that immigration into America was temporarily restricted during the pandemic, so outflows never had a chance to be counterbalanced by inflows. And the exodus to the suburbs may have already peaked. Last year Manhattan gained 17,472 people, the article points out, while counties outside the city lost residents. The Census Bureau notes that was a pattern for 2022: "the smallest counties nationally, those with populations below 10,000, experienced more population loss (60.8%) than gains (38.3%); while the largest counties, having populations at or greater than 100,000, largely experienced population increases (68%)."
Beyond that, the executive director of the DC Fiscal Policy Institute argues that it's just too soon to know whether the pandemic-era outflow from cities was permanent. "We've just been through a major health and economic shock. There's been what I call a doomsday narrative about what's going to happen, with predictions of empty downtowns and city centers that wither and die." They believe the new census data "should give us pause in terms of declaring that we've arrived at a new normal. It's highly likely that some of the folks who left will come back, and we really don't know if it's going to be a lot of them or just a small portion."
Eleven of the 15 largest metro areas gained residents or lost fewer people compared with the previous year, including the D.C. metro area, New York City, the San Francisco Bay Area, and Seattle, according to an analysis by Brookings Institution senior demographer William Frey.... Among the most striking recorded shifts were in Manhattan and San Francisco, both of which lost population at a significant rate between 2020 and 2021. Manhattan, which shrank by 5.87 percent in 2021, grew by 1.11 percent last year. San Francisco lost 6.79 percent of its population in 2021 but shrank by only a third of a percentage point last year. Both are home to a large number of people who were able to work remotely during the pandemic. Covid rates in New York City were especially high early in the pandemic, and many Manhattan residents moved to outlying counties....
"Many counties with large universities saw their populations fully rebound this year as students returned," said Christine Hartley, assistant division chief for estimates and projections in the Census Bureau's population division.
The article also makes the point that immigration into America was temporarily restricted during the pandemic, so outflows never had a chance to be counterbalanced by inflows. And the exodus to the suburbs may have already peaked. Last year Manhattan gained 17,472 people, the article points out, while counties outside the city lost residents. The Census Bureau notes that was a pattern for 2022: "the smallest counties nationally, those with populations below 10,000, experienced more population loss (60.8%) than gains (38.3%); while the largest counties, having populations at or greater than 100,000, largely experienced population increases (68%)."
Beyond that, the executive director of the DC Fiscal Policy Institute argues that it's just too soon to know whether the pandemic-era outflow from cities was permanent. "We've just been through a major health and economic shock. There's been what I call a doomsday narrative about what's going to happen, with predictions of empty downtowns and city centers that wither and die." They believe the new census data "should give us pause in terms of declaring that we've arrived at a new normal. It's highly likely that some of the folks who left will come back, and we really don't know if it's going to be a lot of them or just a small portion."
I wonder (Score:5, Insightful)
...How many of these are forced comebacks? "Come to the office or you're fired!"
Re: (Score:2)
...How many of these are forced comebacks? "Come to the office or you're fired!"
Forced? You mean like the employer expecting you to work or something?
The standard narrative on slashdot is that everyone is able to tell their employer fo sod off, and they'll be able to never go to an office agsin because they are the best of the best, and will be working again with a quick phone call.
Re: (Score:2)
I believe you misunderstood me.
This is not about the employer expecting the employee to work.
This is not even about whether one should work from the office or remotely.
This is only about whether the data is about people coming back into the city because they want to or because they were told to.
I'd like to see statistics like: "X% of those coming back are doing so because their employer mandates coming to office, Y% came back because they didn't like working remotely from outside the city, Z% came back for
Re: (Score:3)
All of them.
There is no reason to work in an office tower anymore. Anyone who tells you otherwise is over 40 and needs to retire.
Re: (Score:2)
Well, I'm over 40 and I think working in an office tower is stupid.
Re: (Score:2)
That was not really work... (Score:2)
A lot of non-asocial (extroverted) younger people actually like the social aspects of work.
If you like the social aspects of work you were probably doing very little actual work.
For a while the tech industry allowed for a LOT of workers to be very slack on actually producing.
Re: That was not really work... (Score:2)
I do enjoy the two days per week when I work from home but typically spend more hours at my computer.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
It was coming to an end ... for most workers except a privledged few.
At the end of the day any employment contract is like a game of tug of war on who has more power. When you have rare valuable skills and there are not enough workers the works pull > employers. The workers dictate the salary and working conditions.
When the pendukumn swings in the other direction like in a recession the employer has a greater pull in the tug of war game and the out of work worker has less than workers employers.
The empl
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Try, just try to force me to come to an office and see me quit.
In this economy, it is my way or the highway.
The chair of the Federal reserve, Jerome Powell (Score:2, Troll)
Your boss is painfully aware that it is economy it's your way or the highway and is taking back control like they always do, recession
Re: (Score:2)
Go for it. I'm working for a company that pretty much has the ruling party in its pocket. Dare you do cause a recession!
You're full of Bologna (Score:2)
Where I don't get is what you get out of defending the 1%. Are they actually paying you the post to this crappy little board? Or are you carrying water for the richest people in human history just for fun?
Re: I wonder (Score:2)
This translates to an opportunity for your peers who will happily take your job while you end up sitting on the couch wondering what happened to your career.
Re: (Score:2)
I have no peers. Do you have a faint idea how rare the skill combination is? There's like 10 of us and about a 1000 wanted. If you want total job security, get that skill set.
Re: I wonder (Score:5, Funny)
My job is due to some C-Levels shitting their pants to be personally liable if the shit hits the fan. Dare to fire me and it will.
I don't give a fuck about VCs. Frankly, just line them up at a wall and shoot them for all I care.
And offshore? Me? Outsource your IT security to China, I fucking dare you!
Re: (Score:3)
Important? Nah. I'm just the guy who has a Fortune 500 by the balls, that's all. You can take your "honest days work" and stuff it, nobody ever got rich by doing a "honest day's work".
You're some delusional petty little troll, that's all. And it's delightful to see you seethe because you know you're nothing, you never be anything, you mean nothing to anyone and you'll never amount to anything while others do.
Yes, that gives me joy.
Re: (Score:2)
All about themselves, thinking they should get everything for free because they're so superspecialawesome even though they're worth fuck all? Who think that they deserve everything and everyone who has it "easier" than them should be punished for it? Who are against handouts, well, unless it's to them?
That's the new alt-right, not the liberals.
You might be barking up the wrong tree here, buddy.
Re: (Score:3)
Me? Personally responsible? Are you high? I wouldn't take any personal responsibility in any of these one-foot-in-jail claptraps. No, sweety. C-Levels can be held personally responsible here for security blunders if they can't show that they have taken "reasonable steps" to avoid it. And that makes me, as their security consultant, a mighty indispensable asset to them.
I frankly don't know what "class" I belong to. I don't care about petty things like money. I have money. What I want is power, money is basic
Re: (Score:2)
Actually I earn less than that. By design. Yes, I could earn more, but as stated before, I have money. I prefer to have power.
You can fire me. Yes. But then please explain to your boss why he now has to hire someone and pay him 50k a year more. Can he have me back? Sure. Won't cost him more. He just has to fire you.
You think you'd be the first PHB I get fired? You'd be the third.
Re: (Score:2)
I forgot to mention "And at some point in time you will die and nobody will care".
Re: (Score:2)
I forgot to mention "And at some point in time you will die and nobody will care".
I think quite a few might read my obituary without displeasure though!
Re: (Score:2)
Sure you do. And mommy and me are really proud of you, too.
Re: (Score:2)
So this is why I get offers for "100% home office" all the time, because it's virtually impossible to get anyone working security if you don't offer that?
Get a skill that's actually in demand and you can have it, too.
Re: (Score:2)
So this is why I get offers for "100% home office" all the time, because it's virtually impossible to get anyone working security if you don't offer that?
Get a skill that's actually in demand and you can have it, too.
My skillset is in really high demand, and I name my price, but half must be in person. Which is fine, as I rather enjoy it.
But here's the thing. You and I might be in a driver's seat, but let's face it, not everyone is, and not every job can be performed remote only.
So outside of personal situations, employers who want employees back in the office probably have a need for them to be there, and after 2 years of the "dark times", there is a lot of inertia to overcome for a lot of people. So I have no do
Re: (Score:2)
There are times when I have to be at the office. Which makes sense, it's hardly possible to put a system worth a couple millions that MUST NEVER get into the wrong hands into my basement. This needs to be in a well secured area where a security level can be established that I cannot duplicate in my basement. I can absolutely understand and accept that.
I only have an aversion to bullshit. If you can't give me a reason for something (and no "do it because I say so" didn't even work for my dad, it sure as fuck
Re: (Score:2)
There are times when I have to be at the office. Which makes sense, it's hardly possible to put a system worth a couple millions that MUST NEVER get into the wrong hands into my basement. This needs to be in a well secured area where a security level can be established that I cannot duplicate in my basement. I can absolutely understand and accept that.
I only have an aversion to bullshit. If you can't give me a reason for something (and no "do it because I say so" didn't even work for my dad, it sure as fuck won't work for some self-absorbed megalomaniac), I will simply and plainly not do it. Explain to me why it is necessary and if I understand and accept your premise without having a sensible counter-offer that accomplishes the same or a better level of execution, I will accept it.
Otherwise, I will not.
Yes, it is that simple.
Not certain if you are referring to me as a self absorbed megalomaniac, but if you are I must say this.
You appear to be in complete control of your own life and situation, and you really need to cherish that. Few on earth are.
Most all of us have to deal with a certain amount of bullshit in our lives and work. Even in my present work, which is as much fun as I've ever had, there are moments that aren't that great.
And yes, there are times when someone must do as I say. It isn't megalomania, it isn't e
Re: (Score:2)
No, the self absorbed megalomaniac referred to some PHBs who think their "because I wanna" is enough reason for me to do something. Like I said, it didn't work for my dad, it sure as hell won't work for some PHB with delusions of grandeur. This is not war, we are not in a trench and "wasting" a minute explaining the reason behind an order will not kill anyone in almost all circumstances.
If anything, it may improve the outcome because, and this is one of the reasons why I need to know the reason behind an or
Re: (Score:2)
My employer is training a guy who makes just 75K a year to do infosec work instead of paying 150K plus bonus to cut down on costs since sales are slowing down. He is hybrid though ... for now. He is beginning to show up to work every day to look important.
We are both older and remember 2004 and 2009. The market dictates who has the ball in the playground. True our skills have grown ... ok mine have tremendously since, but I am under no illusion.
If there is a 15% unemployment and a financial crises where we
Re: (Score:2)
I'm in the fortunate situation that I work because it's fun. Not because I need the money. I have money. But it's fun to see PHBs quiver in their boots when they see me calling them.
That's pretty much why I still work.
Re: (Score:2)
you're delusional, at a real job there are things to be done and milestones to meet. There is no room for slackers.
Sounds like you're butthurt, maybe if you had skills you wouldn't be wasting your life commuting. Quit being a loser.
Well, not every job is programming, and one that even can be performed 100 percent remotely. So you are talking a real subset of people.
Now it is true that a fair number of programmers should be working alone and not around others, but that's an even smaller subset.
So if you can tell your present employer to sod off and not have any interruption in your paycheck, and are willing to forgo any work that requires you be around others- that's great. And the subset is then really shrunk.
Re: (Score:2)
I agree with you 100%. Remote work has even more advantages in terms of lower pollution and options to convert unneeded office space into affordable housing. There is a world of good that it does.
That does not change the fact that extroverts hate it. They have an emotional addiction to the presence of other people, and cannot cope with this isolated working environment. Furthermore, from what I have seen and read, they are (as a group) incapable of self-organizing optional in-office days with other extr
Re: (Score:2)
I agree with you 100%. Remote work has even more advantages in terms of lower pollution and options to convert unneeded office space into affordable housing. There is a world of good that it does.
That does not change the fact that extroverts hate it. They have an emotional addiction to the presence of other people, and cannot cope with this isolated working environment.
If only more people were like you, the human race would go extinct. That's a joke - so no triggering intended.
But while programming is the sort of work that will allow for a lot of at home work, there are many jobs that don't, or like mine, half at home and half on site.
And the on-site work is fun!
Some times it might seem as if a lot of people have bought into a narrative they they have to hate their employer, the C-suite, their supervisors, and their fellow employees. That is counterproductive an
Re: (Score:2)
One thing I think we can say for sure is that the possibility of remote work is higher than before COVID- its more understood and accepted. People know how to use zoom, Teams, etc for remote video calls and remote collaboration. So, there is more flexibility tha
Re: (Score:2)
Well, I do think the world has too many people in it, and of course that number continues to rise. I sure wouldn't mind seeing a non-violent non-evil-in-any-way reduction in the human population. Given the current family-hostile set of laws and cultural values in the developed world, that future may not be too far off.
But I also recognize that some jobs benefit more from working from an office (or "common place of business"). For manufacturing jobs or similar, any argument about working from home is absu
Re: (Score:2)
Well, I do think the world has too many people in it, and of course that number continues to rise. I sure wouldn't mind seeing a non-violent non-evil-in-any-way reduction in the human population. Given the current family-hostile set of laws and cultural values in the developed world, that future may not be too far off.
Indeed! Did you notice that in their analysis of the census data that if not for the influx of immigrants the US population would be imploding?
Young men are not coupling with women. Our African origin brothers are leaving to find wives in other countries. ("white guys as well) Many don't come back - the "Passport Bros" as they are called. Most women are now expecting to couple with the tip-toptop percentage of men - the never settle concept. A woman of African descent has only a 25 percent chance of marry
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Driving to and from work every day is a major cause of pollution. Anything that significantly reduces that represents a net reduction in pollution.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I'm curious how that compares with the inefficiency of heating/cooling houses for each person rather than a single shared space?
There's also the increased traffic in suburbs that shows that people are still driving on a daily basis and also not all commutes are by car either.
Re: (Score:2)
I agree with you 100%. Remote work has even more advantages in terms of lower pollution and options to convert unneeded office space into affordable housing. There is a world of good that it does.
And then again, it is also a form of corporate welfare. My apartment is no longer my home; it is my employer's place of business. Only my employer doesn't pay for the electricity, the water, the heat, the lights, or the internet connection.
As for lower pollution, it could be argued that having 100 individual places of business costs way more than having a centralized office. And if you're talking about commute pollution, take the fuckin train already.
Re: (Score:2)
I am an extrovert and HATE coming in. I work Hybrid and have to go to bed early and wake up at 5:30 and get clothes ready for tomorrow. I prefer to sleep in and stay up midnight and have less stress on my pc in my office area.
I think this remote would cycle back into the office. It was inevitable once economic conditions favor the employer again. Now a severe recession is starting where the employer dictates how we work and our pay rate and if you do not like it you can get your car repad and be homeless as
Re: (Score:2)
I don't think that's true. If we take the spectrum from "office 100%" to "work from home 100%", you'll find at both ends there's more tha
Re: (Score:2)
They're not returning (Score:5, Insightful)
I'm not saying it's a conspiracy (Score:3)
But....
(see History Channel Ancient Aliens meme)
Seriously though, there were reported meetings of local business leaders on the problems due to lack of workers downtown, and then a week later there were all kinds of back to office announcements.
Re: (Score:2)
One has to wonder why. Why would I care as a business owner whether or not some unrelated business survives? It's not like I have a stake in it.
Re: (Score:2)
At the public level, it's politics as usual, as they are members of the same organizations, clubs, whatever, and want to be like each other. Behind the scenes it's more complicated, and is pretty much like you say. It's likely that return to office will be unevenly enforced by those who publicly tout it, as they continue to compete for decent employees. Few conspiracies survive the complexity of reality.
Re: (Score:2)
The first question for me is why RTO anyway. So far, still nobody really offered a consistent explanation why this should be done.
Second, you can rest assured that there are certain groups of people who can easily resist a RTO policy. There are some groups that are not desperately sought, they are being HUNTED DOWN. You have NO idea what my inbox looks like. Recently I had a headhunter bluntly asking what he would have to offer me so I would at least return his mail. I can see it myself, getting security pe
Re: (Score:2)
The proper reply to something like that consists of one word: *plonk!* For those of you too young to know, that's the sound of somebody's address hitting the bottom of your killfile. Just be sure to follow through.
Re: (Score:2)
Actually I found the question kinda weird. And frankly, I didn't know what to answer. There wasn't really anything they could offer me. I'm happy with where I am, my work-life balance is awesome, they're happy to have me, I finally have a manager who knows what his job is (getting the required resources at the right time to the right place in the right amount so I can do my job, I know how to do my job, I don't need him for that), and all that at a company that will probably exist 'til the heat death of the
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Yes, I'm insanely lucky. I just happen to have a skill combination that is not only rare but also incredibly wanted.
Abuse headhunters. Reply to them. Ask them what they can offer to you. Realize, though, that they will just want to pad their portfolio with additional people they can offer. You're just another number they can offer to their clients. And you are NOT their clients. You're their product. Always be aware of that!
Re: (Score:2)
Political as well in office politics. Those who come in can chat with leadership and take on more projects behind the other team's backs and can look more important and dedicated.
Gray hairs promote them. Stupid but I have seen it at my last employer which is why I left.
There is still a stigma people will goof all day if they have distractions and people can't keep an eye on them
Re: (Score:2)
I'm betting the message was: "Tax revenues are way down. Bring your people back into the office and help bring that tax revenue back in. Otherwise, we'll have to find other ways of collecting that revenue."
If you're a business owner located downtown, it's probably in your interest to ensure downtown doesn't turn into a wasteland. In the case of tech companies, they're reducing headcount right now anyhow, so they probably feel somewhat safe in making unpopular demands of their employees. Any *truly* indi
Re: (Score:2)
If I'm a business owner and renting office space in downtown, being able to get away renting less office space should actually be in my interest...
Re: (Score:2)
Empty buildings attract crime including squatting, and costly vandalism. (I have all kinds of sympathy for the squatters, but I'm answering the question asked.) What you really want is to be both collecting rents and raising the value of your real estate, the two of which are interrelated (however distantly.)
Re: (Score:2)
True. But why would I care if it's not my building?
Re: (Score:2)
Maybe they've signed a long-term lease, built the place out, so they've got too many sunk costs to abandon the central office. It could be that they've also been looking for an excuse to pull their workers back in, because managers like to manage. Or they think this is just a temporary blip and lazy workers are trying to take advantage, etc, etc... Hard to say. I'm not sure how else to explain it, because it seems to be happening.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Local mainstream news reports actually, but what you said is also true.
Are people returning to work... (Score:2)
These stats would look the same either way.
So the headline is pure speculation.
Re:Are people returning to work... (Score:5, Insightful)
Judging from the job offers i get, "100% home office" is basically a necessity to find any people willing to work for you.
New people (Score:2)
FTFS: "immigration into America was temporarily restricted during the pandemic"
I'm going to assume that the people moving into cities are not the same as those who moved out.
MOBILITY ? (Score:2)
Residence is one thing, but frankly I trust the Google Mobility (Android) location data much more as an indicator of activity.
Here to stay (Score:3)
I've worked remotely to various extents since 2008, moving from a vestigial office to a shared office space to working from home. Since head office is in Texas and I'm in Canada, moving closer is unlikely. I moved from a major city (Vancouver) to a regional centre (Kamloops) just before the bottom fell out of everything. The move had been in the works for a while and I was settling in nicely when all hell broke loose.
Now? They can keep Vancouver. Not only is it a dump now, the rents have skyrocketed since I left and I refuse to pay that much to live there.
...laura
Are they really returning? (Score:2)
People have been migrating from small towns to cities for more than a century. While the numbers certainly show that people aren't leaving big cities as quickly, are they actually moving to cities in numbers comparable to past years?
Also, the threshold using by the Census Bureau for a "big city" was 100,000 people. If you live in New York or San Francisco or Houston, 100,000 people is pretty small. If these cities are growing, it could still be that people are leaving the biggest cities and moving to smalle
Re: (Score:2)
Put your nose to the grindstone, pleb. People with a skill can simply flip off the PHBs who want to drag them back to the office so they can pretend to be relevant.
Lemme guess, you're one of them, huh? Or are you just one of those space wasters who is pissed that everyone keeps working while they try to feed their narcissist ego by boasting about their exploits nobody gives a fuck about?
Re: (Score:2)
What gives, running out of troll accounts and variation of that silvergun-guy's name that you need to post as AC?
Re: (Score:3)
I have no fucking clue who Damien Lee is or why I should care about it.
And after reading that, I actually care less about it if that was ever possible...
Re: (Score:2)
So let me get this straight, last year the "Great Reset" was being forced on us by the deep state power brokers and now it's been overcome by some people going back to offices? That's all it was? remote work?
Thank you for finally admitting the "Great Reset" was some overblown conspiracy fantasy since now apparently it can mean whatever you want it to be and by that metric is actually meaningless.
That's why you jokers cannot be taken seriously. You will create a scenarios in which you can never be wrong bec
Re: (Score:2)
Thanks for making up a point i wasn't arguing against and arguing against it.
Re: (Score:2)
I never said it was hidden, I said it was "overblown conspiracy fantasy" and you have only made my opinion of that stronger.
Re:Stop trying to make "fetch" happen (Score:5, Insightful)
I never understood the hysteria about having to wear a mask. I mean, if it could have some positive effect, why not? It does have one positive effect regardless, I have to see less of the average ugly mug that crosses my way, so that alone is an asset.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I'm an autist. I don't exactly benefit from facial expressions. the conversation we have right now is pretty much the same amount of information I'd get from having a face to face discussion with you.
And, bluntly, you would not benefit from having a face-to-face interaction with me either because my facial expressions are just what I want you to see (i.e. "masking"), so you would not benefit from it either.
In other words, I have no use for that. I do understand, though, that many people do, so essentially,
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Allow me to reiterate: To me, facial expressions NEVER matter. I cannot read them. I do not understand them. I get exactly the same amount of information from you in this conversation we have right now than I would get if you told me this face to face. I only LOSE in face-to-face interactions because you do get additional (and I have to say, often enough wrong, unless I deliberately concentrate on conveying the correct one) information that I do NOT get.
I can emulate facial expressions reasonably well. To t
Re: (Score:2)
br. One thing that I'm curious about is that you see your use of facial expressions as lying. Wouldn't it be more like using a different language? Most communication should not b a contest, at work most interactions
Re: (Score:2)
The reason I consider it lying is that people have no defense against it. People are absolutely not used to seeing someone lie with their body and they will believe my body almost invariably. Because people generally cannot lie with their body language. And I don't want to lie to you.
On the other hand, having a conversation with me without me taking control of my body language will leave you puzzled and most likely very confused because what my body conveys is absolutely not in sync with what I say, so you
Re:Stop trying to make "fetch" happen (Score:5, Insightful)
I never understood the hysteria about having to wear a mask. I mean, if it could have some positive effect, why not? It does have one positive effect regardless, I have to see less of the average ugly mug that crosses my way, so that alone is an asset.
That's because you don't get the conservative mindset.
You don't get to tell them what to do, even if it's wearing a mask or vaccinating during a pandemic. They get to tell you what to do, which medical procedures you're allowed, who you are allowed to marry, etc.
Re: (Score:2)
This is irrational. I don't want to interact with irrational people.
Re: (Score:2)
What the fuck are you talking about?
Re: (Score:2)
Are you responding to the wrong post or something? This is basically the other side of the "fuck you got mine" attitude coin that you wrote in a post below.
Re: (Score:2)
That isn't an accurate description of the conservative mindset.
One significant motivator for them is familiarity. It's what they use, even more than data, to determine what feels true to them. If they grew up with it, and are familiar with it, then it is probably good. If it is new then it is weird, and viewed with suspicion. If it makes them feel squeamish then it is wrong or harmful. It is possible to convince some of them, sometimes, to listen to the data instead of this gut-feel. It's a matter of
Re: (Score:2)
I've said this to other people, I'll tell you too. The hysteria was because masks don't prevent you from catching an illness from others, they prevent others from catching an illness from you.
"Wear a mask to protect myself? Sure, I'd do that. Wear a mask to protect others but not me? Get the fuck out of here."
Re: (Score:2)
And that's the problem. You think people would wear a mask if it protects others from them? If you think so, think again. So people get told it protects them. So they wear it. And yeah, it .... well, it kinda does, sorta, (at least the N95, the normal OP mask does fuck all in that regard) but the biggest benefit is to others.
So yes, people were lied to. And people don't like that. The alternative, though, would have been that people, being the selfish assholes they are, would not have done it either. So wha
Re: (Score:2)
If there were magic covid-only masks, it may be sensible to require them during a covid outbreak.
This doesn't compute. What matters is whether the masks are more helpful at saving lives in a given situation than they are harmful, or not. Then you either mandate them, or you don't. If you're responsible, you use precautionary principles. You therefore compare to known things, determine whether the masks are worth implementing temporarily on that basis based on those similar situations, and proceed rationally. That goes both for whether there is a recommendation, and also for how it is rational to feel a
Re: (Score:3)
Masks don't save lives. They change the rate of spread.
Right. When that means hospitals aren't overloaded, then it saves lives. Why are people still confused about this? It isn't that complicated.
Re: (Score:2)
You mean like a vaccine?
Charlie Baker is a Republican (Score:2)
In Massachusetts, good old Charlie Baker with a 65%+ approval rating essentially ruled by decree for 15 months, during which time he put tens of thousands of people out of work, sabotaged the child care industry to such a degree it still hasn't recovered, and played games keeping politically disfavored businesses (like gun stores) closed for extra long until he get told to behave by the courts.
This is incompatible with the idea of an accountable government and self-rule.
You said above:
Pre covid, one could, with a straight face, claim that democrat run dense cities were overall good for business.
Charlie Baker is a Republican...and I've actually met him and got to have a brief conversation with him at an event. He also gave a long speech. He's DUMB AF. Seriously...he's a stupid frat boy. I've never met a bigger himbo in all my life...although that has no relevance to your point or mine. However, your theories of Democratic persecution are kinda diminished when you bring up him as an example.
Re: Charlie Baker is a Republican (Score:2)
You've said as much before. And you're supposed rebuttal to my screed is that yes he's an empty suit but he technically has an R next to his name?
Re: (Score:2)
Well, technically, me wearing a mask protects you. Yes, I know, most people don't give a fuck about their fellow people. I do. I wear a mask to protect you. It would be nice if you did the same, so in case you get infected, you don't spread it to others.
With a "screw you, I got mine" attitude, this of course does not work.
Re: (Score:2)
Masks really are living rent free in your head. Perhaps you could use some therapy or boot straps to overcome your mental anguish?
City Talent vs Sururban Mediocrity + Geography (Score:2)
Urbanism is an obsolete relic from before the information age. Anything that can be done in a central business district can be done better and cheaper in a suburban office park and/or online.
If you think that, you don't live in a major metropolitan area. First of all, most of our superstars live near the city, not in the burbs. The urban dwellers are more likely to have an advanced degree and be a bit more hardcore about their profession and live that childless work-hard/play-hard lifestyle. The farther out you go, the more the ratio goes from high-talent childless couples/individuals to low-talent busy suburban parents....sure, it's a ratio...there are suburban superstars and urban duds, bu
Re: City Talent vs Sururban Mediocrity + Geography (Score:2)
Yeah...you drunk the koolaid...no arguing about that. Newsflash guy: all the "city" offices in Boston and Cambridge *are* satellite office of outfits like IBM that practically invented the suburban office park and are *only* in the city to snap up the recent grads who will work 80 hour weeks for peanuts. Being recent grads, most of their output is trash, but if they get paid bupkis and work-sleep-work at their desks 52 weeks a year, it doesn't matter.
We're sitting out here in the burbs laughing our asses of
Re: (Score:2)
Yeah...you drunk the koolaid...no arguing about that. Newsflash guy: all the "city" offices in Boston and Cambridge *are* satellite office of outfits like IBM that practically invented the suburban office park and are *only* in the city to snap up the recent grads who will work 80 hour weeks for peanuts. Being recent grads, most of their output is trash, but if they get paid bupkis and work-sleep-work at their desks 52 weeks a year, it doesn't matter.
We're sitting out here in the burbs laughing our asses off at the retards who think a 3rd floor walkup with 4 roommates is somehow a sign of success.
First of all, stop using the r-word. You may be a conservative and a contrarian, but you don't have to be a total asshole. Why are you being a jerk to the mentally challenged? What have they ever done to you? It's shitty and just makes you look ignorant. While I disagree with you, your arguments are too intelligent to resort to such language.
If you think Boston and Cambridge are mostly satellite offices, you really don't know Boston and Cambridge, then. You're referring to Google? Microsoft? Amazo
Re: City Talent vs Sururban Mediocrity + Geograph (Score:2)
Redhat is in the seaport. That's IBM. They used to be only out by 495. But they wanted to be where the cool kids are so they ponied up for office space in the hardest part of town to get to unless you already live there with three roommates.
And that's my hypothesis for why: social pressure and that's it. Cambridge had some kind of inertia because at one point they had city regs favorable to biotech...and then Boston tried to copy it with tax incentives for office space of one kind or another.
But the thing o