vegetarianism in our future?

[Damocles]

SO you're not presenting an argument against telecommuting. Ok. It seemed like you throwing up a lot of bullshit on the wall to see if it would stick. I must have been mistaken. It's good to know you're on board.

I am not. I asked a question.

 

[Damocles]

Maybe what damo is saying is that telecommuting will effect property values, as living "intown close to work" will no longer be as desirable and will not jack up those property values. But this impact should be ignored, if the situation is really as dire as presented.

No, I am saying that it will lower the value of office real estate. I personally love the idea, but it is something to consider when incentivizing the act. If we consider this, we may be able to offset that worry.

 

[Bai Lan]

I am not. I asked a question.

An irrelevant boneheaded one!

 

[Onceler]

If they are telecommuting why do they need to rent?

The reality is this will lower the need for office space. I like it, but companies will dislike their assets losing value.

Whether it is a "bad foundation" it is reality. When considering whether employees will telecommute the corporations will, in fact, consider what they will do with property.

We're at a stage now where most corporations should welcome the opportunity to reduce overhead, and lease out unused office space. Many corporations have shared space, so employees who still have to come to the office for a few days can share a desk with an employee in a similar situation. Space is also only part of the overhead that a full-time on-site employee incurs.

The fact is, many companies don't do it simply because they worry about worker productivity when they're offsite. Surveys have shown that this is somewhat unfounded, and some workers are more productive at home, particularly when there are larger commuting times involved.

It's the future, at least for a lot of white collar jobs.

 

[uscitizen]

Of course it matters.

It doesn't change that incentivizing telecommuting is a fantastic idea, but it matters to corps what to do with that real estate.

turn the office space into a hydroponics greenhouse to produce food.

 

[Damocles]

We're at a stage now where most corporations should welcome the opportunity to reduce overhead, and lease out unused office space. Many corporations have shared space, so employees who still have to come to the office for a few days can share a desk with an employee in a similar situation. Space is also only part of the overhead that a full-time on-site employee incurs.

The fact is, many companies don't do it simply because they worry about worker productivity when they're offsite. Surveys have shown that this is somewhat unfounded, and some workers are more productive at home, particularly when there are larger commuting times involved.

It's the future, at least for a lot of white collar jobs.

You cannot lease out unused office space if everybody has the same incentive to telecommute.

Again, we should consider what companies will consider when incentivizing, otherwise the incentive may be ineffective.

 

[Onceler]

You cannot lease out unused office space if everybody has the same incentive to telecommute.

Again, we should consider what companies will consider when incentivizing, otherwise the incentive may be ineffective.

I think you're overestimating the concern. In urban areas, a lot of space could be converted into apartments or luxury condo's; an expensive conversion, but plenty of payoff.

I think we're a long way away from getting rid of office space altogether. Even for companies that allow & encourage telecommuting, many employees still have to spend a few days in the office, and certain departments, like IT & HR, logically remain in the office.

 

[Damocles]

I think you're overestimating the concern. In urban areas, a lot of space could be converted into apartments or luxury condo's; an expensive conversion, but plenty of payoff.

I think we're a long way away from getting rid of office space altogether. Even for companies that allow & encourage telecommuting, many employees still have to spend a few days in the office, and certain departments, like IT & HR, logically remain in the office.

It would just be easier to continue as they are then suck up the cost of converting.

If we do not attempt to understand the value of the centralized workplace to the employer when incentivizing we will have ineffective incentive.

Just a tax break won't do it if they fear the value of their assets would be less. The "they could be converted" idea is fine, if first you give them enough incentive to convert.

Every bit of cost is considered, if you don't think so look at places that remove water purifying systems at the massive cost of $1 per person per year.

 

[Bai Lan]

It would just be easier to continue as they are then suck up the cost of converting.

If we do not attempt to understand the value of the centralized workplace to the employer when incentivizing we will have ineffective incentive.

Just a tax break won't do it if they fear the value of their assets would be less. The "they could be converted" idea is fine, if first you give them enough incentive to convert.

Every bit of cost is considered, if you don't think so look at places that remove water purifying systems at the massive cost of $1 per person per year.

Or maybe the corporate bottom line should not be factored in here at all.

 

[TRGLDTE]

Yes.

 

[uscitizen]

yes
me too.

 

[Topspin]

this is funny shit, oncelor have you ever supervised people. You obviously state an eloquent argument for telecommuting from the employee's perspective.
You have yet to make even a remotely effective one from the employers perspective, which is the Main concern.

 

[Onceler]

this is funny shit, oncelor have you ever supervised people. You obviously state an eloquent argument for telecommuting from the employee's perspective.
You have yet to make even a remotely effective one from the employers perspective, which is the Main concern.

Almost everyone at my company telecommutes. As a result, my employer has one of the lowest overheads in the industry, which stockholders love. They need less space, less office furniture, fewer facilities, use less electricity & water. Employees aren't commuting 1-3 hours a day, and most end up working during those hours because of the incentives they receive.

It's a win-win for everyone, but of course, it does depend on the industry & work involved. If the work requires intense supervision, obviously, it wouldn't be effective.

 

[uscitizen]

Well it is clear that spinner needs constant supervision.
otherwise no one would get their expense checks

 

[Damocles]

Or maybe the corporate bottom line should not be factored in here at all.

Dumb. It would be foolish to intend to incentivize but not to consider who you are attempting to give the incentive to. If you want to dictate how they run their companies to such a level then just get over it and make this a fascist state.

 

[Care4all]

A 4 day work week, 10 hours a day, could cut energy expences and energy/transportation use for most every business/employee in America 20% without having to offer tax payer's money as an incentive.

 

[Care4all]

We are selling our own wheat, grown here to the highest bidder and the USA hasn't been the highest bidder lately...

There will be shortages here also, the wheat will go to who has the most money...that is just a FACT of life and capitalism.

Maybe we should consider reinstituting the Family Farm, in every community that has the space and ability to do such, so we don't have to spend the money transporting our food...?

just because of what is going on now, I have recently joined a local farmer's coop...their prices seem higher than the grocery store now, but in the future i see them being more stable and reasonable than the mass producers that import....

care

 

[Bai Lan]

We are selling our own wheat, grown here to the highest bidder and the USA hasn't been the highest bidder lately...

There will be shortages here also, the wheat will go to who has the most money...that is just a FACT of life and capitalism.

No it's not. It's a delusional ideology which says markets forces must be honored despite national ruin.

Maybe we should consider reinstituting the Family Farm, in every community that has the space and ability to do such, so we don't have to spend the money transporting our food...?

just because of what is going on now, I have recently joined a local farmer's coop...their prices seem higher than the grocery store now, but in the future i see them being more stable and reasonable than the mass producers that import....

care

I like this though.

 

[Care4all]

Also, I know it might sound silly and I brought this up over a year ago, buy seeds NOW for fruits and vegies....they have already tripled in price, especially for heirloom seeds that have not been genetically manipulated...but please, buy some....it can't hurt, they are in my emergency kit for the family...yes, water, canned goods, dried goods, paper products, plastic , batteries, radio, vitamins, neosporin, medicines, first aid kit and veggie and fruit seeds and bags of miracle grow!!!!! LOL....

care

I swear....they are in my Emergency Kit!!!

 

[uscitizen]

We are selling our own wheat, grown here to the highest bidder and the USA hasn't been the highest bidder lately...

There will be shortages here also, the wheat will go to who has the most money...that is just a FACT of life and capitalism.

Maybe we should consider reinstituting the Family Farm, in every community that has the space and ability to do such, so we don't have to spend the money transporting our food...?

just because of what is going on now, I have recently joined a local farmer's coop...their prices seem higher than the grocery store now, but in the future i see them being more stable and reasonable than the mass producers that import....

care

I see us going more back to the small region concept on many things as transportation costs increase. local dairies coming back instead of one that serves 4 states, bakeries, some manufacturing, etc.