Hopefully it will result in some dispersing of the higher-educated workforce back to the midwest and cheap areas to live once they realize they can maintain a certain lifestyle outside New York. Anecdotely, my cousins moved from Brooklyn to Nashville and were working remotely at first, but now both work 'in' Nashville. Hopefully this has a reverse brain-drain effect in places like Ohio from Chicago, New York and other cities.

On 8/19/2020 at 3:41 PM, BigDipper 80 said:

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. 

I was doing my job fully remote pre-covid and have continued since. I'm far more productive at this job than my last because I have great co-workers and a good work environment. And personally being home is a big stress reliever. That said I think it will vary a lot between industries and people. The number who can go fully remote just fine is probably more than you think, but obviously not 100%.

I think it's probably fine to telework when you've got a lot of "busy work" on your plate (making spreadsheets, updating CAD drawings, reviewing documents, etc) but I don't find teleconferencing very useful for strategic decision-making and the types of discussions that go along with that. It's hard to make big-picture roadmaps and manage entire systems when everyone is in different rooms. 

I would hate working from home.  When I was in college I always went to the library or somewhere else to read and write.  

 

I and many other people live in noisy areas where there is always some crap going on in the neighborhood.  Motorcycles, car alarms, arguments, etc. 

In college I had to leave my apartment to get any homework done. Coffee shops, libraries, etc. I've been working form home since mid-March, and with a dedicated space to work, it's actually been pretty productive. I'm at least as productive as I was in the office.

On 8/19/2020 at 2:37 PM, 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.

 

And here's Jerry Seinfeld with the excellent counterpoint:

 

Quote

Energy, attitude and personality cannot be “remoted” through even the best fiber optic lines. That’s the whole reason many of us moved to New York in the first place.

 

You ever wonder why Silicon Valley even exists? I have always wondered, why do these people all live and work in that location? They have all this insane technology; why don’t they all just spread out wherever they want to be and connect with their devices? Because it doesn’t work, that’s why.

 

I also just think that many of the people fleeing big cities (especially cities where a specific industry is headquartered) are not thinking about their future career prospects. Just because you have worked out an arrangement with your current employer and they have agreed to let you work remotely for the rest of time...what happens if you need to change jobs in the future? When a company is interviewing candidates 5 years from now, and their choices are someone in Tulsa who wants to work 100% remotely or a local person who can be in the office 2 or 3 days a week (and WFH the other days)...why would they choose the 100% remote person? For most jobs there is a lot of value in face-to-face interactions and a 100% remote workforce just isn't going to cut it. There are also a lot of SVPs who derive their sense of power from seeing "their team" filling desks. They are not going to be OK with empty offices and a fully remote workforce.

Absolutely. Do not move to Welch WV just because you have a job right now. That's arrogant.

52 minutes ago, taestell said:

When a company is interviewing candidates 5 years from now, and their choices are someone in Tulsa who wants to work 100% remotely or a local person who can be in the office 2 or 3 days a week (and WFH the other days)...why would they choose the 100% remote person?

 

Yep.  And 9 out of 10 people are never going to perceive the #vanlife candidate as a serious person.  

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2020-09-14/at-jpmorgan-productivity-falls-for-younger-employees-at-home

13 minutes ago, viscomi said:

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2020-09-14/at-jpmorgan-productivity-falls-for-younger-employees-at-home

Having worked in an office environment for most of my life this seems like a no brainer to me.

Edited September 16, 20204 yr by Htsguy

Turns full-time jobs into gig economy

 

Yep. I'm pretty confident large scale WFH isn't going to cut it long term no matter how much some people/companies wished it did ?

It's like, if you have a regular group who hits the bar at 5:15pm on Fridays, you can get amazingly productive around 4pm in order to make sure you get there on time.  

On 8/20/2020 at 3:53 PM, BigDipper 80 said:

I think it's probably fine to telework when you've got a lot of "busy work" on your plate (making spreadsheets, updating CAD drawings, reviewing documents, etc) but I don't find teleconferencing very useful for strategic decision-making and the types of discussions that go along with that. It's hard to make big-picture roadmaps and manage entire systems when everyone is in different rooms. 

this. 

1 hour ago, jmecklenborg said:

It's like, if you have a regular group who hits the bar at 5:15pm on Fridays, you can get amazingly productive around 4pm in order to make sure you get there on time.  

lol this hit home for me! ? "oh shhh... it's already 4?! I need to get this report done"

Edited September 16, 20204 yr by Cincinnatus

The 15-minute city is gaining greater attention with covid-19 and climate change. Back when I was in college in the 1980s we were talking about this concept although we didn't call it the 15-minute city. We just called it good urban planning using nodes and linkages between nodes....

 

https://www.c40knowledgehub.org/s/article/How-to-build-back-better-with-a-15-minute-city?language=en_US#:~:text=In a '15-minute city,decentralising city life and services.

 

 

What can Cleveland do to better position itself as a climate change refuge?

 

After the wildfires this year, I've seen more and more articles like this: https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2020/09/im-leaving-the-west-coast/616493/

 

Clearly climate migrations, on at least some level, are already occurring. When you look up climate migration destinations, Cleveland isn't at the top of any lists I've seen, however. But this seems like a huge marketing opportunity for the city. Green Bay, Milwaukee, Chicago, Detroit, Toledo, Cleveland, Buffalo, and Rochester seem to me to be the most logical places in the U.S. to move if you are a climate refugee. The extreme weather these cities have is basically limited to snow storms and all of them are located on some of the world's largest freshwater reserve which makes them basically immune to any foreseable drought. That last part is an advantage that non-coastal cities, even far northern ones like Minneapolis, distinctively lack.

 

So why isn't Cleveland doing a PR campaign to put itself at the top of these climate migration lists? Seems like a huge opportunity to me.

8 minutes ago, LlamaLawyer said:

What can Cleveland do to better position itself as a climate change refuge?

 

After the wildfires this year, I've seen more and more articles like this: https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2020/09/im-leaving-the-west-coast/616493/

 

Clearly climate migrations, on at least some level, are already occurring. When you look up climate migration destinations, Cleveland isn't at the top of any lists I've seen, however. But this seems like a huge marketing opportunity for the city. Green Bay, Milwaukee, Chicago, Detroit, Toledo, Cleveland, Buffalo, and Rochester seem to me to be the most logical places in the U.S. to move if you are a climate refugee. The extreme weather these cities have is basically limited to snow storms and all of them are located on some of the world's largest freshwater reserve which makes them basically immune to any foreseable drought. That last part is an advantage that non-coastal cities, even far northern ones like Minneapolis, distinctively lack.

 

So why isn't Cleveland doing a PR campaign to put itself at the top of these climate migration lists? Seems like a huge opportunity to me.

If Cleveland wants to reposition itself as the place where people go it needs to turn its climate into a tropical paradise. Instead of cool winds blowing off Lake Erie 8 months of the year, it needs to be warm tropical breezes. Cut winter down to 2 months a year instead of 8 months. 

Cleveland does not have the same institutional power of New York or Chicago ot overcome the climate issues. 

^Because no great cities have lousy weather. 

^^ Well this explains why Seattle is the fastest growing major city in the U.S.; it’s so rainy that nearby areas qualify as rainforests! ?

^^^ If England had waited for nice weather, there would have been no British Empire.

6 hours ago, Brutus_buckeye said:

If Cleveland wants to reposition itself as the place where people go it needs to turn its climate into a tropical paradise. Instead of cool winds blowing off Lake Erie 8 months of the year, it needs to be warm tropical breezes. Cut winter down to 2 months a year instead of 8 months. 

Cleveland does not have the same institutional power of New York or Chicago ot overcome the climate issues. 

 

Pretty sure that's the dumbest comment I've ever seen from you. You write as if cities are genetically predisposed to be what/where they are at this moment in history and aren't the result of the collective will of people.

If Cleveland wants to market itself as a climate refuge or whatever (and we are talking about marketing here), it would have to continue the environmental improvements that are in progress and ramp up in other ways. We have 2/9 of the big wastewater tunnels done, great job on those, let's finish the rest of them, and clean up the lake. Cleveland still has relatively poor air quality, we gotta reduce emissions and have clean electric power.

5 hours ago, KJP said:

 

Pretty sure that's the dumbest comment I've ever seen from you. You write as if cities are genetically predisposed to be what/where they are at this moment in history and aren't the result of the collective will of people.

It was a bit tongue and cheek. But that is one of the challenges Cleveland faces right now. A big reason why people move to the SunBelt is weather. That does pose a bit of a challenge for Cleveland to overcome.  Personally, it was a consideration I had when I moved from Cleveland. 

In the old days, complaining about the weather meant you were a wuss, but in the 21st century, wusses rule. 

 

 

This sign has lately appeared in the Cleveland Park section of Washington DC. As you may guess, not everyone totally agrees.

 

EDIT: I should probably mention that $1 million will barely get you a starter house in Clevelaand Park.

 

 

On 4/12/2021 at 12:27 PM, Dougal said:

 

EDIT: I should probably mention that $1 million will barely get you a starter house in Clevelaand Park.

 

Funny, that’s what I was thinking when I read that.  It’s easy to put a sign like that up when you know your neighborhood is out priced for the majority of the population.   Makes me think of all the neighbors in Shaker that have BLM signs.  Most moved from surrounding areas that were getting too.... diverse.  
BTW, it was those prices in that and the surrounding DC neighborhoods that had us choosing Shaker heights.  

 

That is great news for core cities. Unfortunately that's not the end of it. This ruling will be appealed. 

 

With all the problems kickstarting urban economies post-covid cities' ability to continue to tax workers where they are employed as opposed to where they (temporarily?) work will be crucial to their survival. 

We'll see 

 

3 hours ago, KJP said:

We'll see 

 

My university and many others are quickly returning to in-person work. June 1st, all employees will return to full-time on campus work at BGSU. 

More and more businesses are ending remote work, and the restructured office spaces and hybrid models are, in many cases such as my company, garbage. Middle management and execs love it of course. 

 

My new job search now requires full remote work, high salary notwithstanding. 

 

We just can't go backwards. 

Hybrid models are probably going to be the most popular, and they will still have an impact on cities. In Ohio, you can file for a return for days worked outside of a municipality where your office is. So if commuters are only in the office 2 or 3 days a week, they'll only have to pay taxes for those days.

 

That said, I don't think many people realize that.

11 minutes ago, Ram23 said:

Hybrid models are probably going to be the most popular, and they will still have an impact on cities. In Ohio, you can file for a return for days worked outside of a municipality where your office is. So if commuters are only in the office 2 or 3 days a week, they'll only have to pay taxes for those days.

 

That said, I don't think many people realize that.

Side question: Does anyone know the get-around to the principle of taxation and representation when it comes to paying taxes in a city where one doesn't live (or vote)? In my case, I work in Bowling Green and pay a 2% city income tax there, and then another .5% to Toledo, where I reside. I can vote for city council in Toledo, but not BG (even though I still keep in touch with city council members there). Why do I pay taxes to a place where I have zero say in how, or how much, money is spent?

17 minutes ago, Ram23 said:

Hybrid models are probably going to be the most popular, and they will still have an impact on cities. In Ohio, you can file for a return for days worked outside of a municipality where your office is. So if commuters are only in the office 2 or 3 days a week, they'll only have to pay taxes for those days.

 

That said, I don't think many people realize that.

Good luck trying to file this kind of return with CCA or RITA.  Their own employees don't even understand the regs, let alone the taxpayer.  

^Lancaster, where I work, went from 1.75% to 2.2% Jan 1. So now Groveport, where I live, is at 2% so now they get nothing and Lancaster gets it all. I've already called RITA (who handles Groveport, in contrast to Lancaster who does it themselves) to tell them what's going on and sent in two forms. Still waiting for a super angry letter from them with a $1000 fine to come in over a $25-a-quarter matter within 6 months to two years. Hey, maybe not?

19 hours ago, westerninterloper said:

Side question: Does anyone know the get-around to the principle of taxation and representation when it comes to paying taxes in a city where one doesn't live (or vote)? In my case, I work in Bowling Green and pay a 2% city income tax there, and then another .5% to Toledo, where I reside. I can vote for city council in Toledo, but not BG (even though I still keep in touch with city council members there). Why do I pay taxes to a place where I have zero say in how, or how much, money is spent?

 

Why would you get to vote in a city you don't live in? Voting is all about residency.

 

I don't understand why people feel they are entitled to vote in a place they don't live. Where does it stop, then? If I work in Kentucky, but live in Cincinnati, should I get to vote in Kentucky elections, too? Why is income tax what people are so concerned about? Should you get to vote in a city election because you pay sales tax there? Or maybe you own property, but don't live in the city. Should you be allowed to vote in the city you own property in, too?

 

You pay taxes to BG because when you're working there the city takes care of you (police, fire, sewer, water, electricity, roads, sidewalks, etc). So you are using city services when you're in Bowling Green.

Athletes would vote in a lot of cities in that scenario. Touring bands as well. Of course there could be some kind of exemption.

If I drive from Ohio to the East Coast and buy gas in Pennsylvania, should I have the right to vote in Pennsylvania because I just paid the gas tax there? Or if I buy a pack of gum at a PA Turnpike service plaza and pay sales tax on it?

 

20 hours ago, Cleburger said:

Good luck trying to file this kind of return with CCA or RITA.  Their own employees don't even understand the regs, let alone the taxpayer.  

 

In Cincinnati it is surprisingly straight forward. They have a tax return form specifically for people who worked elsewhere but were taxed by the city. My only complaint about the paperwork is that the city makes you list each individual day worked out of the city as a line item. So if you work at home about half the time, you have to submit a list of ~120 days. It's way more paperwork than it needs to be because you could arrive at the same result by just writing "120 days."

 

I live in a township that has no income tax, so my wife and I will start keeping track of the days we work remote as soon as we hit the +30 day mark after the emergency order ends on June 2nd. I will mostly be in the office but my wife will be at home a majority of the time. It should be a de facto raise unless there's something I'm missing.

12 minutes ago, KJP said:

If I drive from Ohio to the East Coast and buy gas in Pennsylvania, should I have the right to vote in Pennsylvania because I just paid the gas tax there? Or if I buy a pack of gum at a PA Turnpike service plaza and pay sales tax on it?

The rule is not about representation but contacts. Paying 7% sales tax in PA for a stick of gum or a hotel tax for visiting a place is about the contact you have at that place and the use of services.  Paying income tax for working in BG and living in Toledo is about the contact you have in BG by commuting there and using the services of BG. While working in BG you rely on the roads and police and fire services, etc so income taxes are legal based on those contacts.

 

It really is not justified (and courts will likely follow the existing precedence here soon) to charge income tax for working at a company based in Bowling Green but working out of your home in Toledo. There are no direct contacts in Bowling Green where you use their services so to pay income tax to that municipality is not really justified. (I will demurr a bit because being Toledo to Bowling Green and State Income tax, the Ohio legisliature does have more power to legislate in favor of the current plan in place). However, if you were to change the scenario and say have someone work from home with a company based in Lima  but live in Fort Wayne, you now have a Federal issue and prior precedence has shown that charging them muni income tax would likely not be justified). 

This is a current case moving through the SC where New Hampshire is suing Massachusetts about taxastion of their residents who work remotely for Boston companies and how that is no longer justified. This could really screw places like NYC and Boston who have a lot of high income people who live out of state. 

Congress forbids the District of Columbia to tax suburban income earned in DC.  As a result that provision forced DC to gentrify, telling themselves we have to attract more upper income people in order to be able to afford the poor folks.  Once they got some decent protections for the poor in place, everybody went along with it.  Everything gentrified except the school system, which is still an expensive sorepoint.

1 hour ago, Brutus_buckeye said:

The rule is not about representation but contacts. Paying 7% sales tax in PA for a stick of gum or a hotel tax for visiting a place is about the contact you have at that place and the use of services.  Paying income tax for working in BG and living in Toledo is about the contact you have in BG by commuting there and using the services of BG. While working in BG you rely on the roads and police and fire services, etc so income taxes are legal based on those contacts.

 

It really is not justified (and courts will likely follow the existing precedence here soon) to charge income tax for working at a company based in Bowling Green but working out of your home in Toledo. There are no direct contacts in Bowling Green where you use their services so to pay income tax to that municipality is not really justified. (I will demurr a bit because being Toledo to Bowling Green and State Income tax, the Ohio legisliature does have more power to legislate in favor of the current plan in place). However, if you were to change the scenario and say have someone work from home with a company based in Lima  but live in Fort Wayne, you now have a Federal issue and prior precedence has shown that charging them muni income tax would likely not be justified). 

This is a current case moving through the SC where New Hampshire is suing Massachusetts about taxastion of their residents who work remotely for Boston companies and how that is no longer justified. This could really screw places like NYC and Boston who have a lot of high income people who live out of state. 

That was my understanding - based on the time spent in the city where one works. I do spend quite a bit of time in BG, but if I wanted to, I could come and go from town traveling exclusively on federal, state, and university roads, to university (state) property covered by the university police, perhaps technically not entering the city or using many of its public services. 

53 minutes ago, westerninterloper said:

That was my understanding - based on the time spent in the city where one works. I do spend quite a bit of time in BG, but if I wanted to, I could come and go from town traveling exclusively on federal, state, and university roads, to university (state) property covered by the university police, perhaps technically not entering the city or using many of its public services. 

Well I’m sympathetic to your argument, I think there’s a big difference between working and living in Ohio versus working in Ohio and living in a different state. I don’t think that traveling on federal roads are university Roads would be enough to overcome your challenge. Municipal income tax is affectively a state income tax, in the state legislature ultimately controls where those funds go. In this case, they permit municipalities to have some discretion over funds and allow them to loving their own tax. But the state legislature can take that away and handle things differently if they so choose. There would be no federal issue here and it would be solely a state matter sense all parties involved would be Ohio citizens. Well I may not personally agree, I get the reasoning. 
The best likelihood is when you can have a federal matter in such a case, and that would typically have to involve an out-of-state resident with an Ohio employer

BTW, just in case you didn't already know, NIMBY's are everywhere. They blocked this development of a parking lot in Seattle because, why not.....

 

 

What we were is what we should be again. So much wonderful built environments were sacrificed at the altar of the almighty car. I doubt Europe was physically destroyed more by World War II than US cities were destroyed by the car. The GMs, Studebakers, Shell, Phillips, et al did exactly what they said in the 1930s they would do. This is Kansas City....

 

On 5/18/2021 at 5:54 PM, KJP said:

BTW, just in case you didn't already know, NIMBY's are everywhere. They blocked this development of a parking lot in Seattle because, why not.....

 

I think one can be a little more sympathetic to NIMBYs in a city like Seattle with a sustained population explosion and Amazon essentially taking over the town. A friend of mine from Seattle has remarked that since Amazon became huge, a lot of his favorite things about Seattle are gone, and it doesn't have the charm it once had.

 

Those kinds of complaints make a lot less sense in a city where 2/3 of the population is gone and the population rebound has either just begun or not started yet.