Good article about Fuel Cells, though I'm not completely convinced that it will never happen. I took a class on fuel cell technology during my Masters Studies, and he did hit on some of the existing drawbacks to using Hydrogen as a fuel source.  One thing he did not point out, that is at least as important, is that existing Hydrogen fuel cells can be "Poisoned" very easily.  The hydrogen must be very pure (99.98%, I think) to avoid poisoning or damaging the fuel cell.  Even then, with current technology, don't expect to have your Hydrogen Fuel Cell vehicle be useful for 10+ years as what little impurities are in the fuel will eventually damage it to the point it will need to be replaced.

 

I was always curious about what the "EROI" would be for using hydrogen, and though it will vary depending on how you generate and implement your hydrogen usage, 20% seems like a reasonable ballpark number.  Still, despite these obstacles, I'm not as pessimistic as the author.  Yes, there are many hurdles to be overcome, but there are also lots of very intelligent people working on the in vehicle application problems such as storage, Fuel Cell efficiency, etc.  I think the real issues, which he pointed out, are how will we make and distribute all the hydrogen?  As someone pointed out earlier, I don't think any single power source will dominate in the future, and we may have vehicles that utilize multiple energy sources to get us where we want to go. 

 

Personally, I am disappointed that more emphasis has not been put into energy storage, such as batteries and super-capacitors.  When you are driving your vehicle, and have to stop or go downhill, there is energy there to be captured.  Current Hybrids do capture a little bit of this energy, but there are constraints as to how much of that energy can be captured.  There is a lot more there we are wasting!  Good article.

E. Kyle Steinhauser of Frisco: A nation in decay

 

12:40 PM CDT on Sunday, August 24, 2008

 

In conjunction with the Independence Day holiday, The Dallas Morning News ran articles and editorials decrying the decay of our nation's capital. The National Mall – America's front yard – suffers from severe mismanagement and neglect. My wife and I ventured to Washington, D.C., to celebrate on the Fourth of July this year, and, if anything, the newspaper understated the problem.

 

While I have nothing but praise for the city and its handling of the spectacle, the National Mall is a national embarrassment. The image that stuck with me was not the fireworks exploding above the Lincoln Memorial but duck feces that lined the reflecting pool in front of the memorial. If Forrest and Jenny met there today, they would have to follow their embrace with tetanus shots.

 

Although the pool no longer reflects the sky, it does reflect the poor state of our nation.

 

...

 

E. Kyle Steinhauser of Frisco is a technology marketing manager at a publishing company and a former Voices of Collin County volunteer columnist. His e-mail address is [email protected].

 

http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedcontent/dws/news/city/collin/opinion/stories/DN-north_ekyle_24edi.ART.North.Edition1.4db1615.html

The national mall thing is true.  Whenever I'm in Washington, I can not believe how brown the grass is, and the amount of bird poo poo ewverywhere.  The flowers don't even look healthy.  They really need to do something about that.  Car Dealerships are better landscaped than the national mall.

"Finally, nothing screams collective failure like the complete lack of a national energy policy. I find it inexcusable that it has been more than 30 years since the first energy crisis, but no administration – Democrat or Republican – attempted to plan for our nation's energy future. Nothing is more critical to our nation's very economic or political survival than energy independence. We have known that for a century, but yet done little."

 

Of all the things mentioned, this paragraph seems to stand out. You know it's a sad day when an old, tired-looking, Texas oil billionaire (T. Boone Pickens) has to buy TV time to privately tell us how to solve our energy problems. All of the terrorist threats to our national security and safety pale against the threat of an energy meltdown. Either by accident or by design, the federal government has done nothing to reduce the impact of skyrocketing oil/gas prices. Even the strategic petroleum reserves sit by unused-I guess they are are strictly for government/military use during a national emergency. We are currently witnessing the extinction of native U.S. automakers as they too were apparently caught completely off guard by the current spike in energy prices. And if you think that is bad, just wait until we or Israel tries to stop Iran's ambitious nuclear program-the Iranians will block the Persian Gulf to all tankers causing a global economic crisis and a spike in oil prices even the Saudi's never imagined.

 

Our energy situation is a huge vulnerability and if not fixed very soon, our foes will surely exploit it.

 

Great article on the future of America's cities in today's NY Times

 

The New York Times

 

March 29, 2009

Reinventing America’s Cities: The Time Is Now

By NICOLAI OUROUSSOFF

 

THE country has fallen on hard times, but those of us who love cities know we have been living in the dark ages for a while now. We know that turning things around will take more than just pouring money into shovel-ready projects, regardless of how they might boost the economy. Windmills won’t do it either. We long for a bold urban vision.

 

With their crowded neighborhoods and web of public services, cities are not only invaluable cultural incubators; they are also vastly more efficient than suburbs. But for years they have been neglected, and in many cases forcibly harmed, by policies that favored sprawl over density and conformity over difference.

 

Such policies have caused many of our urban centers to devolve into generic theme parks and others, like Detroit, to decay into ghost towns. They have also sparked the rise of ecologically unsustainable gated communities and reinforced economic disparities by building walls between racial, ethnic and class groups.

 

...

 

The full article is here:

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/03/29/arts/design/29ouro.html?_r=1

I would like to move to a major city but most American cities have the same problems; high crime, poor schools, corruption, inept leadership, poor maintenance of services etc.... The cap and tax bill will push people back to the city and it would be nice to see a major takeover of the administration of the cities to a new generation of leaders. Another problem would be the crowd that complains the poor and minorities would be pushed out..which would be a good thing since they are a big reason people left the cities....

"Another problem would be the crowd that complains the poor and minorities would be pushed out..which would be a good thing since they are a big reason people left the cities...."

 

Well at least you don't beat around the bush with your racist views. :roll:

"Another problem would be the crowd that complains the poor and minorities would be pushed out..which would be a good thing since they are a big reason people left the cities...."

 

Seriously, minorities were the reason why people left cities? Like MayDay said, at least we know where you stand.

In yokosuka's defense, there is a steady group of people that seem to argue against any kind of urban investment.  There is a certain segment of the population that associates "urban" with the poor, and feel that the disruption of this equation threatens their own lives.

I'm not sure I would call the comment "racist." Certainly uninformed and misinformed. Maybe even ignorant. But it certainly is indicative of a lot of misguided perceptions in the world.

 

It ignores decades of institutionalized racism in federal policies and business practices that led to urban decline. It ignores decades of federal and state policies that favored suburban development, to the detriment of cities. The resulting changes in cities led to an increase in crime  -- and a much, much greater increase in the perception of crime. Likewise with schools: The perception is greater than the reality. People think suburban schools are good and urban schools are bad, when one of the biggest factors is household income level.

 

I could ramble on about this, but we need to change the perception of cities. Having an urban president who goes back to relax in a densely populated neighborhood and visit his old haunts there will be refreshing change from a president who goes far away from cities and pretends to clear brush.

I'm not sure I would call the comment "racist." Certainly uninformed and misinformed. Maybe even ignorant. But it certainly is indicative of a lot of misguided perceptions in the world.

 

It ignores decades of institutionalized racism in federal policies and business practices that led to urban decline. It ignores decades of federal and state policies that favored suburban development, to the detriment of cities. The resulting changes in cities led to an increase in crime  -- and a much, much greater increase in the perception of crime. Likewise with schools: The perception is greater than the reality. People think suburban schools are good and urban schools are bad, when one of the biggest factors is household income level.

I could ramble on about this, but we need to change the perception of cities. Having an urban president who goes back to relax in a densely populated neighborhood and visit his old haunts there will be refreshing change from a president who goes far away from cities and pretends to clear brush.

 

Very well stated.  Although, personally, I feel the posts are race and class based.  I'll bow out now.

It seems yokosuka1985 was just pointing out that a lot of people left urban areas for the suburbs, and racial tension was one of the reasons they did so .  You guys really think the term "white flight" came about, and had nothing to do with race?  Anyways, as we've seen in Cincinnati, the NAACP in particular, as well as some of the homeless organizations routinely oppose urban advancement because of the perceived notion that it would displace blacks.  Race can’t be ignored when you have people from all sides throwing it into the mix constantly.

^I don't think Yokosuka 1985 needs a lot of "defending".  If you review all of his posts on various threads, like MayDay suggests, there is a clear tinge of racism.

^I don't think Yokosuka 1985 needs a lot of "defending". If you review all of his posts on various threads, like MayDay suggests, there is a clear tinge of racism.

 

So be it, but that doesn't make race any less of an issue with urban redevelopment, and it bothers me when people shy away from it for reasons of political-correctness.

I dont think anyone here has shied away from race or race related subjects/issues. 

"Seriously, minorities were the reason why people left cities?"  Coat tailing on what Ram said this quote displays more ignorance than anything in Yuko's post.  Racism is alive an well in NEO, perhaps not in the form of "hate" but certainly an indoctrinated disdain for minorities and their perceived societal ills.

"Seriously, minorities were the reason why people left cities?"  Coat tailing on what Ram said this quote displays more ignorance than anything in Yuko's post.  Racism is alive an well in NEO America, perhaps not in the form of "hate" but certainly an indoctrinated disdain for minorities and their perceived societal ills.

 

Corrected that.

"Seriously, minorities were the reason why people left cities?" Coat tailing on what Ram said this quote displays more ignorance than anything in Yuko's post. Racism is alive an well in NEO America, perhaps not in the form of "hate" but certainly an indoctrinated disdain for minorities and their perceived societal ills.

 

Corrected that.

 

Yeah, I always have to do that.

Yes, perhaps minorities are a reason that people left the cities. I don't think it's racist to point that out. But to suggest that minorities and poor people getting pushed out of the city is a "good thing" ... um, that seems blatantly racist and classist. There's a difference between noting the underpinnings of sprawl and flight 40 years ago. It's another thing to advocate the displacement of whole groups of people as a strategy for addressing said sprawl and flight.

Yes, perhaps minorities are a reason that people left the cities. I don't think it's racist to point that out. But to suggest that minorities and poor people getting pushed out of the city is a "good thing" ... um, that seems blatantly racist and classist. There's a difference between noting the underpinnings of sprawl and flight 40 years ago. It's another thing to advocate the displacement of whole groups of people as a strategy for addressing said sprawl and flight.

 

Originally, people have left core, central areas because a decline in the quality of living of such places. Overcrowding and unsanitary conditions from the industrial revolution was the reason Cincinnatians literally started heading for the hills in the 1800's. This original sprawl was made possible by the streetcar and interurban systems. Those of the lower classes, mostly immigrants, often filled these voids because the conditions of the neighborhood made them cheap and affordable. It was this phenomenon that created the first ethnic (and sometimes religious) ghettos. Depending on the decade and immigration trends, the ethnicities varied....Irish, Italian, Jewish, Polish, Greek, etc.

 

The same thing happened in the 20th Century. As the aforementioned ethnicities became further assimilated into the established society, new ethnicities began to take their places in these ghettos. The reasons were often the same...old, overcrowded, and dirty neighbors made for cheap living. However, not only did you have immigrants from different parts of the world coming to cities but migrants as well. African-Americans fled the south for the factory jobs in the north, as did those from rural Appalachia.

 

There is no question that white-flight, based upon racism occurred, especially after WWII. Prior to that racism obviously did exist but the Great Depression economically prevented any large scale racially-based sprawl. The federal legislation passed during the Depression along with the post-war economic boom and highway construction coupled with racism allowed for an entirely new kind of sprawl. Thus was the birth of the modern-day suburb.

 

So historically speaking, when talking about city development and growth you cannot take race and class out of the equation. But to say that removal of minorities from a city is good thing is completely preposterous.

 

 

 

Very, very well said. 

Yes, perhaps minorities are a reason that people left the cities. I don't think it's racist to point that out. But to suggest that minorities and poor people getting pushed out of the city is a "good thing" ... um, that seems blatantly racist and classist. There's a difference between noting the underpinnings of sprawl and flight 40 years ago. It's another thing to advocate the displacement of whole groups of people as a strategy for addressing said sprawl and flight.

 

Originally, people have left core, central areas because a decline in the quality of living of such places. Overcrowding and unsanitary conditions from the industrial revolution was the reason Cincinnatians literally started heading for the hills in the 1800's. This original sprawl was made possible by the streetcar and interurban systems. Those of the lower classes, mostly immigrants, often filled these voids because the conditions of the neighborhood made them cheap and affordable. It was this phenomenon that created the first ethnic (and sometimes religious) ghettos. Depending on the decade and immigration trends, the ethnicities varied....Irish, Italian, Jewish, Polish, Greek, etc.

 

The same thing happened in the 20th Century. As the aforementioned ethnicities became further assimilated into the established society, new ethnicities began to take their places in these ghettos. The reasons were often the same...old, overcrowded, and dirty neighbors made for cheap living. However, not only did you have immigrants from different parts of the world coming to cities but migrants as well. African-Americans fled the south for the factory jobs in the north, as did those from rural Appalachia.

 

There is no question that white-flight, based upon racism occurred, especially after WWII. Prior to that racism obviously did exist but the Great Depression economically prevented any large scale racially-based sprawl. The federal legislation passed during the Depression along with the post-war economic boom and highway construction coupled with racism allowed for an entirely new kind of sprawl. Thus was the birth of the modern-day suburb.

 

So historically speaking, when talking about city development and growth you cannot take race and class out of the equation. But to say that removal of minorities from a city is good thing is completely preposterous.

 

 

 

Very, very well said.

 

I concur!

"Seriously, minorities were the reason why people left cities?"  Coat tailing on what Ram said this quote displays more ignorance than anything in Yuko's post.  Racism is alive an well in NEO, perhaps not in the form of "hate" but certainly an indoctrinated disdain for minorities and their perceived societal ills.

 

I agree with this to an extent...... about the statement being ignorant....

 

However..... it is about time we stop being 'prejudiced' and labeling people 'racist' just because what they say does not conform to someone's idea of what a non-racist is. I am sick to death of that.... And it seems that the word 'racism'  these days, is always referenced to, in white to black terms...  When we never seem to acknowledge the reverse discrimination and racist attitude many blacks have to whites for no other apparent reason than having that chip on their shoulder with some inferiority complex.

 

 

The prevailing environment regarding racism between blacks/whites seems to be that blacks can call out whites as being rascits, but whites cannot call out blacks if they sense they're being racist? It's time we stop being soooo overly politically correct to the point the truth in what we all really want to say gets buried.

 

My roots were from Europe...and my kin endured their sad share of racism...and if we acknowledge that there is a rest of the world out there beyond the US borders...we realize this is not something that is exclusively about difficulties between Americanized Caucasians/Af. Am....and in reality....  what becomes a BIG part of a drain on population in cities goes back to the simple aspect of bad neighbors and bad behavior causes a lot of people to move in any given area at any given time. People live where they have a sense of safety, peace, and comfort in their own home and neighborhood...  Much of the dramatic behavior that steals that sense often is concentrated in the core, OR, at least associated with it. Am I allowed to acknowledge that? Or am I being a racist?

 

Would I be a racist if I said I hate suburban life because of the frequently occurring noises and lawn chemical poisons coming from incessant lawn care freaks? ...and that this behavior steals my sense of peace? (I really do hate that part about what has become a lot of the mentality of the burbs these days)

 

 

Well, if one can be labeled one for making note at a truism associated with the inner city..then to be fair...the same should be applied for making notes at the truisms of suburban environments. By that logic, I guess I am a racist. ;-)

I'm white. And I'm calling people who think removal of minority groups from cities a "good thing" racist. Particularly if 100% of said people's posts reference race or class. And I stand by my right to do so :)

 

Saying that I hate the sterility and homogeneity and artificiality and big box nature of the suburbs is one thing. If someone says that they're glad that all the white people live out there and away from me in the city ... well, arguably, that could be a racist statement, although you could get into a very detailed debate about whether minority groups can actually be racist because of historic injustices, inbalances of power, etc., etc. But I believe that's probably meant for another thread.

Well, let's ask ourselves very simple questions like "when we think about what america visually represents and how we place ourselves in it, what does it look like".  Who are your friends?  Do you have 1 black friend, 1 white friend, an Asian buddy you hang with on the weekends and a fashionable gay guy that helps you shop? Is your connection with people who don't look like you real or is it merely surface deep.  Do you understand the struggles, temptations, passions of others or are you ignorant of your "friend's" experiences.  See, the problem that I have with alot of talk concerning America and it's cities comes from people who won't allow others to be real around themselves and who don't make much effort to build real relationships with people who don't look like them.

 

My point being that America is what it wants to be - a country of a lot of different groups who very rarely know each other.  That, given some exceptions, is a fact.

Well, let's ask ourselves very simple questions like "when we think about what america visually represents and how we place ourselves in it, what does it look like".  Who are your friends?  Do you have 1 black friend, 1 white friend, an Asian buddy you hang with on the weekends and a fashionable gay guy that helps you shop? Is your connection with people who don't look like you real or is it merely surface deep.  Do you understand the struggles, temptations, passions of others or are you ignorant of your "friend's" experiences.  See, the problem that I have with alot of talk concerning America and it's cities comes from people who won't allow others to be real around themselves and who don't make much effort to build real relationships with people who don't look like them.

 

My point being that America is what it wants to be - a country of a lot of different groups who very rarely know each other.  That, given some exceptions, is a fact.

 

Sounds like Urban Ohio

Black Guy - check

White Guy - check

Asian - check

Fashionable Gay Guy - Snap

 

If someone says that they're glad that all the white people live out there (suburbs)...

 

Boy, you guys really do need to get out to the suburbs more if you think it's all white people (of European descent).  I have no hard numbers to back up these opinions, but my Mom lives in Lakewood and I spend a lot of time there, and there are a TON of Arab-Americans there.  And as I've mentioned on here before, my apartment complex, which has over 900 units, goes this way in terms of ethnic breakdown: 85% Indian, 5% Arab-Americans, 5% Other - other including whites, blacks and Hispanics.  The rest of Middleburg Heights and in Strongsville has a LOT of Indians and Arabs as well, as evidenced by the # of Indian and Arab groceries and specialty stores (like clothing) that I see.  And as you know I worked at Southpark Mall for the last 1.5 years and there were as many foreign language-speaking customers shopping in my department as there were those for whom English was a first language. 

^ No worries, I don't think it's all white ... in the same way that I don't think central cities are entirely composed of minority groups. Just was pointing out the often faulty logic of what I perceive to be racism :)

If someone says that they're glad that all the white people live out there (suburbs)...

 

Boy, you guys really do need to get out to the suburbs more if you think it's all white people (of European descent).  I have no hard numbers to back up these opinions, but my Mom lives in Lakewood and I spend a lot of time there, and there are a TON of Arab-Americans there.  And as I've mentioned on here before, my apartment complex, which has over 900 units, goes this way in terms of ethnic breakdown: 85% Indian, 5% Arab-Americans, 5% Other - other including whites, blacks and Hispanics Latinos.  The rest of Middleburg Heights and in Strongsville has a LOT of Indians and Arabs as well, as evidenced by the # of Indian and Arab groceries and specialty stores (like clothing) that I see.  And as you know I worked at Southpark Mall for the last 1.5 years and there were as many foreign language-speaking customers shopping in my department as there were those for whom English was a first language. 

Y'all don't know what it's like, being male, middle class, and white.

 

That was a pretty good "bump" for such an old thread.

Well Ben Folds was beaten by almost 20 years by The Descendents:

That's a good one. I remember getting that album about 15 years ago. They crammed a lot of Changes That Work into those short songs.

THE DOW OF CITIES 

APRIL 12, 2018

BY JOE CORTRIGHT

 

The daily business news is obsessed with the price of stocks. Widely reported indicators like the Dow Jones Industrial average gauge the overall health of the US economy by how much, on any given day (or hour, or minute) investors are willing to pay for a bundle of stocks that represent the ownership of some of the nation’s biggest businesses. After peaking in January, investors have become decidedly skittish and pessimistic about the US economy, as evidenced by wild daily gyrations and an overall fall of almost 10 percent the Dow Jones Industrials (DJI).

 

At City Observatory, we’ve applied the same idea — a broad market index of prices — to America’s cities. We’ve developed an indicator we call “The Dow of Cities.”  Like the DJI, we look at the performance of a bundle of asset prices, in this case, the market values of homes in the nation’s densest urban neighborhoods.  And because we’re focused on cities, we compare how prices for houses in cities compare with the price of houses in the more outlying portions of metro areas.

 

Here’s the simple number: Since 2000, home prices in city centers have outperformed those in suburbs by 50 percent. In graphic terms, it looks like this:

 

 

...The reason of course is that housing demand can (and is) changing much faster than supply — which is why prices are rising so much. Rising prices are both a positive indicator of the value consumers place on city center living, and a reminder that as we’ve said many times at City Observatory, we’re experiencing a shortage of cities. And the rising relative prices for city locations are the market’s way of saying “we want more housing in cities” and “we want more cities.” While the strength in the housing sector has been an urban focused boom in new rental apartments, the fact is that supply isn’t growing rapidly enough.  We aren’t creating new San Franciscos and new dense, walkable, transit-served neighborhoods in other cities as fast as the demand for urban living is increasing — and that means that prices are continuing to rise.

 

MORE:

https://www.strongtowns.org/journal/2018/4/11/the-dow-of-cities

Seems like this is an okay thread for this. 

 

I didn't realize downtown Tampa was getting so much investment.

https://urbanland.uli.org/development-business/3-billion-project-transforming-downtown-tampa/

 

 

Edited April 16, 20196 yr by surfohio

I think the whole Snowbird thing is probably going to come back. For a while there starting in the late '90s it tapered off as Florida property prices became too expensive. Also '90s winters south of U.S. 30 were total weaksauce as compared to ones in the '50s-'80s. Now those long nasty winters have returned. Older people need to exercise and be active during months other than May and October. This post has been brought to you by someone smelling his first whiffs of Old.

A podcast:

Urbanist and author Alain Bertaud of NYU talks about his book Order without Design with EconTalk host Russ Roberts. Bertaud explores the role of zoning and planning alongside the emergent factors that affect the growth of cities. He emphasizes the importance of cities as places for people to work and looks at how preferences and choices shape cities. Bertaud also reflects upon the differing perspectives of urban planners and economists.

http://www.econtalk.org/alain-bertaud-on-cities-planning-and-order-without-design/

Must be making an impact to instigate such a fear-mongering opinion piece...

 

 

This trend might bode well for Ohio metros. Perhaps it already is..

 

Why Are America’s Three Biggest Metros Shrinking?

After a post-recession boomlet, the New York, Los Angeles, and Chicago areas are all seeing their population decline.

https://www.citylab.com/life/2019/09/why-are-americas-three-biggest-metros-shrinking/597682/

 

^ Funny I just spoke with a friend who argued that the Silicon Valley economy was unsustainable, and that California is about to "Detroit-itself." 

Silicon Valley is interesting, because it's actively trying to make products that would in the aggregate undermine its own economy. If the ultimate goal of telecommuting tech (which a lot of tech is, either implicitly or explicitly) is achieved, there will be no reason for tech companies to geographically concentrate.

On ‎9‎/‎11‎/‎2019 at 2:31 PM, KJP said:

This trend might bode well for Ohio metros. Perhaps it already is..

 

Why Are America’s Three Biggest Metros Shrinking?

After a post-recession boomlet, the New York, Los Angeles, and Chicago areas are all seeing their population decline.

https://www.citylab.com/life/2019/09/why-are-americas-three-biggest-metros-shrinking/597682/

 

I think this is a little premature.  The supposed losses are based entirely on estimates, so we don't actually know for sure if there have been any real losses.  We'll find out for sure in early 2021.

 

That said, I can say that in terms of Columbus only, New York has been one of the biggest out-of-state feeders for its metro domestic migration since 2010, so you're not wrong when you say Ohio might benefit.

 

Edited September 18, 20195 yr by jonoh81

Seen a similar map before. Still blows my mind. Land-wise, America is rural. But it's population is decidedly urban/suburban. BTW let's keep this as a data-based demographic/socio-economic discussion and keep the politics in the political threads....

 

 

Two related tweets....

 

 

 

I keep seeing people claiming that NYC is dead and sharing anecdotes about people fleeing big cities and moving to smaller cities or to the suburbs.

 

 

Have the people fleeing NYC actually checked with their bosses to see whether they will be able to work from home permanently? Because I have a really, really hard time believing that offices are dead and every white collar job is going to be done remotely forever, even after COVID is behind us.

20 minutes ago, taestell said:

I keep seeing people claiming that NYC is dead and sharing anecdotes about people fleeing big cities and moving to smaller cities or to the suburbs.

 

 

Have the people fleeing NYC actually checked with their bosses to see whether they will be able to work from home permanently? Because I have a really, really hard time believing that offices are dead and every white collar job is going to be done remotely forever, even after COVID is behind us.

 

All of that stuff is anecdotal. From what I can tell the actual data don't show any new trends in this regard. We'll see how it shakes out, but people have been declaring NYC dead since about 1665.

30 minutes ago, taestell said:

I keep seeing people claiming that NYC is dead and sharing anecdotes about people fleeing big cities and moving to smaller cities or to the suburbs.

 

 

Have the people fleeing NYC actually checked with their bosses to see whether they will be able to work from home permanently? Because I have a really, really hard time believing that offices are dead and every white collar job is going to be done remotely forever, even after COVID is behind us.

 

"I can connect to Zoom using dial-up, right? Did you know houses are only $25,000 in McDowell County, West Virginia? I'll just hop on I-81 to I-78 to come in twice a month."

I despise virtual meetings, and most Millennials that I talk to hate them too. They're even less productive than normal face-to-face meetings because you can just ignore them. I really doubt there will be as big of a shrink in office space as some people think. 

53 minutes ago, DEPACincy said:

 

All of that stuff is anecdotal. From what I can tell the actual data don't show any new trends in this regard. We'll see how it shakes out, but people have been declaring NYC dead since about 1665.

 

If New York City can survive the 1970s, it can easily surivive this blip. Cities are incredibly resilient, especially ones the size of Rome, Constantinople/Istanbul, London, San Francisico, Detroit, etc. They all faced worse than this. Even cities as small and as economically beaten up as Gary, East St. Louis and Youngstown are still there albeit still recovering. It takes a lot more than this to wreck a city.

I worry about these folks who are moving out of the cities so quickly now just because they can work from home. The whole situation is still so new and fluid. What happens to someone who moves from NYC to Ohio now because they are all work from home, and then in two months the company decides WFH isn't as productive and recalls everyone to the office? A big wave of people moving back to the big cities they left? Or more jobless people "stuck" in the smaller cities? Good luck to them I guess.