|
Any and all updates regarding the COVID-19 will need a source provided. Please do your part in helping us to keep this thread maintainable and under control.
It is YOUR responsibility to fully read through the sources that you link, and you MUST provide a brief summary explaining what the source is about. Do not expect other people to do the work for you.
Conspiracy theories and fear mongering will absolutely not be tolerated in this thread. Expect harsh mod actions if you try to incite fear needlessly.
This is not a politics thread! You are allowed to post information regarding politics if it's related to the coronavirus, but do NOT discuss politics in here.
Added a disclaimer on page 662. Many need to post better. |
On August 31 2022 04:20 GoTuNk! wrote:Show nested quote +On August 30 2022 07:20 aseq wrote:
But that's more of a general debate than a Covid problem. I'd rather not pay towards the same healthcare with probably way over 50% of the people here. There are tons of reasons, not only antivaxers, but also smokers, fat people, people with allergies, people who go skiing and break stuff, people who drive too fast, etc. Wait till you find out perverse incentives, on various degrees, apply to all government programs
An interesting story recently is that Japan, which still isn't fully open to tourists due to COVID-19, launched a campaign to try to get young adults to drink more alcohol to boost liquor tax revenues. A bit of public health mixed messaging I think. I suspect they are going to open back up very soon, though. They've been at 200,000 new cases/day for a month straight, a few tourists with COVID isn't really going to move the needle.
|
Norway28674 Posts
Healthy lifestyle choices has the benefit of making you healthier. I'm not worried about health care costs but I sure as hell don't want to be obese, wth. Additionally, actual socialized health care will realize that the adage 'an ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure' is very true, and focus accordingly. American obesity rates are not in any way related to 'socialized health care', but there are plenty ways to give partial blame to capitalism.
There are areas where you might accurately claim that government can incentivize 'perverse' behavior, particularly when risks are socialized but benefits privatized (does happen in the US), but government paid health care does not incentivize living unhealthily. A privatized industry making more money from treatment than they make from prevention or curing though? Pretty obvious which one is the more perverse incentive tbh.
|
Northern Ireland25458 Posts
It speaks very much to what I was touching on earlier that there’s such an innate resistance to the idea of giving people more flexibility in their lives, cutting out commutes and thus reduce general congestion. Also hey look you can spread your working populace out from crowded high rent areas as physical proximity to your job becomes less important.
In the longer run if it’s normalised, that could conceivably distribute wealth to previously run down areas.
As office space becomes less necessary, well repurpose business properties into residential ones.
I mean not on this site in particular so much but there’s a hell of a lot of instinctive reactionary nonsense that doesn’t address the cost/benefit on its merits as a proposition. A mix of ‘I have/had to commute so everyone should’ mixed with the types who fetishise the grind.
|
|
|
On August 31 2022 07:07 WombaT wrote:
It speaks very much to what I was touching on earlier that there’s such an innate resistance to the idea of giving people more flexibility in their lives, cutting out commutes and thus reduce general congestion. Also hey look you can spread your working populace out from crowded high rent areas as physical proximity to your job becomes less important.
In the longer run if it’s normalised, that could conceivably distribute wealth to previously run down areas.
As office space becomes less necessary, well repurpose business properties into residential ones.
I mean not on this site in particular so much but there’s a hell of a lot of instinctive reactionary nonsense that doesn’t address the cost/benefit on its merits as a proposition. A mix of ‘I have/had to commute so everyone should’ mixed with the types who fetishise the grind.
I don’t have any innate resistance to work from home. San Francisco has traffic congestion and the highest housing costs in the country. If people want to fuck off out of here and work remotely I’m here for it. I’m agnostic. I’m just unconvinced by the argument “oh it’s fantastic and if you disagree it’s because you are brainwashed to accept the work grind as normal”
|
Northern Ireland25458 Posts
On August 31 2022 08:03 BlackJack wrote:Show nested quote +On August 31 2022 07:07 WombaT wrote:
It speaks very much to what I was touching on earlier that there’s such an innate resistance to the idea of giving people more flexibility in their lives, cutting out commutes and thus reduce general congestion. Also hey look you can spread your working populace out from crowded high rent areas as physical proximity to your job becomes less important.
In the longer run if it’s normalised, that could conceivably distribute wealth to previously run down areas.
As office space becomes less necessary, well repurpose business properties into residential ones.
I mean not on this site in particular so much but there’s a hell of a lot of instinctive reactionary nonsense that doesn’t address the cost/benefit on its merits as a proposition. A mix of ‘I have/had to commute so everyone should’ mixed with the types who fetishise the grind.
I don’t have any innate resistance to work from home. San Francisco has traffic congestion and the highest housing costs in the country. If people want to fuck off out of here and work remotely I’m here for it. I’m agnostic. I’m just unconvinced by the argument “oh it’s fantastic and if you disagree it’s because you are brainwashed to accept the work grind as normal”
I did say I was more talking about attitudes I’ve encountered outside TL tbf.
I am adding the considerable caveat that it’s WFH, as an option. As I said, I’m personally choosing to go the office with my new job, the only new start to do so. I’ll probably revert back to hybrid after a bit, but getting in the office suits me least for the time being.
That said it’s not really a counter-argument I particularly like, I think it has some applicability. Dislike the term brainwashed very much mind.
If one has a good counter-argument, stick it on the table. Happy to discuss it. For the proposition ‘everyone in an applicable should commute to an office every working day’, well there may be good reasons and arguments, but they better be damn good ones.
Alternatively there’s a blank slate approach, the thought experiment ‘well if we were to start from scratch what would you do?’ Shed the baggage of tradition and assess the options on their relative merits.
Again, this isn’t really targeted at TLers but people continually fail to justify their position via either prism, to at least some degree then their defence of it is tied up in emotion, identity and/or tradition.
|
On August 31 2022 08:03 BlackJack wrote:Show nested quote +On August 31 2022 07:07 WombaT wrote:
It speaks very much to what I was touching on earlier that there’s such an innate resistance to the idea of giving people more flexibility in their lives, cutting out commutes and thus reduce general congestion. Also hey look you can spread your working populace out from crowded high rent areas as physical proximity to your job becomes less important.
In the longer run if it’s normalised, that could conceivably distribute wealth to previously run down areas.
As office space becomes less necessary, well repurpose business properties into residential ones.
I mean not on this site in particular so much but there’s a hell of a lot of instinctive reactionary nonsense that doesn’t address the cost/benefit on its merits as a proposition. A mix of ‘I have/had to commute so everyone should’ mixed with the types who fetishise the grind.
I don’t have any innate resistance to work from home. San Francisco has traffic congestion and the highest housing costs in the country. If people want to fuck off out of here and work remotely I’m here for it. I’m agnostic. I’m just unconvinced by the argument “oh it’s fantastic and if you disagree it’s because you are brainwashed to accept the work grind as normal”
That's an argument noone has made, though.
|
Working from home wouldn't move people out of urban areas it would move them back into urban areas. Suburbs are built in the anti person hell state that they are because they assume everyone with the money to buy the house is going to be commuting. If the office space is suddenly less profitable than renovating it into apartments you'll see large populations of middle class families moving back into the urban environments.
The reason why Europeans are healthier than the us is by design. Start making communities where people can walk to things and they'll start walking to things. Because they all pay into healthcare they're now incentivized into making healthcare cheaper.
And to bring it back preventative care is lots cheaper than emergency care. A vaccine is lots cheaper then post infection treatments and hospital stays. Making preventative care available for people would shove down healthcare costs by a ton and make weight loss actually profitable. Private healthcare makes obesity and diabetes profitable.
|
|
|
The primary purpose of WFH is work efficiency - reduce time wasted on commuting, stuck in lunch hour queues, and unnecessary physical meetings.
I personally don't think flexibility should be a factor. WFH should not be a means to juggle house chores, taking care of children, or chilling out on Xbox. If you want flexibility, then opt for part-time working arrangement, freelance, and so on (which existed even pre-COVID and before the term WFH became mainstream)
I'm speaking about WFH on full time basis. Nothing irks me more when a colleague goes MIA during working hours (which is easier when WFH). Creates bottleneck and disrupts everyone's own workflow. WFH is not cool when people abuse it to have a flexible work life at the expense of other people.
|
|
|
On August 31 2022 10:20 Sermokala wrote:
Working from home wouldn't move people out of urban areas it would move them back into urban areas. Suburbs are built in the anti person hell state that they are because they assume everyone with the money to buy the house is going to be commuting. If the office space is suddenly less profitable than renovating it into apartments you'll see large populations of middle class families moving back into the urban environments.
The reason why Europeans are healthier than the us is by design. Start making communities where people can walk to things and they'll start walking to things. Because they all pay into healthcare they're now incentivized into making healthcare cheaper.
And to bring it back preventative care is lots cheaper than emergency care. A vaccine is lots cheaper then post infection treatments and hospital stays. Making preventative care available for people would shove down healthcare costs by a ton and make weight loss actually profitable. Private healthcare makes obesity and diabetes profitable.
Wait, what is your theory for why people move to the suburbs? Having to commute is not a benefit to living in the suburbs. Most people choose to live in the suburbs despite the longer commute. No longer having to commute makes the suburbs even more favorable.
|
Flexi-working arrangement and WFH are two different concepts. WFH can be part of a flexi-working arrangement, of course.
I'm not arguing against people to have flexible working arrangements. That's what people should strive for to have a balanced lifestyle.
All I'm just saying that for people in full-time fixed working arrangement, WFH is a viable alternative worth pushing - but for the right reasons.
I'm all for WFH, by the way. But people who abuse it don't help the WFH cause.
|
|
|
And some fields will never be able to get WFH like the field I was dumb enough to get into with manufacturing. But even those fields are seeing of change now with covid. I have a three-day work week now and I'm happy as can be with it.
There are problems with change yes but these are vastly more solvable problems than fundamental issues that would be helped greatly by the change. Suburbs were a massive mistake that cause continual harm to society as a whole.
|
Just an anecdote to explain why the two concepts shouldn't be mixed up.
During the peak of pandemic, my workplace had a policy where everyone on a fixed working arrangement had to come into office, whilst those on flexible working arrangement automatically had to WFH. Guess what? The latter group was annoyed because they couldn't come into office unless they jump through administrative hoops. The former group was also annoyed because their time in office was spent having virtual calls with the latter group stuck at home. Absolutely silly and ridiculous HR policy from the top. Work productivity and morale took a deep dive for everyone.
That's what happens when people don't think through work arrangements with common sense.
|
On August 31 2022 05:46 Simberto wrote:Show nested quote +On August 31 2022 02:48 Artisreal wrote:
why can an employer dictate me to come to work if I can do the same work at home, or even more work at home?
where's the freedom in that? Well, they pay you. And they don't only pay you to do your work, they pay you to do the work in the way they want it done. Your choice, obviously, is to choose an employer which allows you to do that same work from home. And if enough people do that, the employers which don't allow it will notice that they have a greatly reduce pool to hire from, and may change their ways.
It's a bit tongue in cheek but still ridiculous to me that the yoke of capitalism is so often seen as freedom.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
