What are you guys paying for gas?

[BuzzH]

Imo, I would like to see legislation to force the old boomer managers to have their telework eligible employees work from home.

This team building crap and forcing people into offices and cube farms is archaic. Just a sorry excuse for some over paid stuffed suit middle manager can pretend to stay busy babysitting 5 employees needs to end.

Less people driving to work to sit in front of a computer all day, dumps fuel demand and thus lowers price for those that really do have to drive to work.

Businesses need to rethink their strategy....if not, force them to.

 

[Deleted member 28227]

Imo, I would like to see legislation to force the old boomer managers to have their telework eligible employees work from home.

This team building crap and forcing people into offices and cube farms is archaic. Just a sorry excuse for some over paid stuffed suit middle manager can pretend to stay busy babysitting 5 employees needs to end.

Less people driving to work to sit in front of a computer all day, dumps fuel demand and thus lowers price for those that really do have to drive to work.

Businesses need to rethink their strategy....if not, force them to.

 

[TOGIE]

Imo, I would like to see legislation to force the old boomer managers to have their telework eligible employees work from home.

This team building crap and forcing people into offices and cube farms is archaic. Just a sorry excuse for some over paid stuffed suit middle manager can pretend to stay busy babysitting 5 employees needs to end.

Less people driving to work to sit in front of a computer all day, dumps fuel demand and thus lowers price for those that really do have to drive to work.

Businesses need to rethink their strategy....if not, force them to.

i think leaders of organizations and businesses vastly underestimate how many people are willing to quit and switch jobs over this issue too.

 

[BigHornRam]

i think leaders of organizations and businesses vastly underestimate how many people are willing to quit and switch jobs over this issue too.

Turn the empty office space into homeless shelters.....

Elon Musk wants Twitter HQ as homeless shelter; Amazon boss Jeff Bezos reacts

Elon Musk floated the idea of turning Twitter Inc.’s headquarters into a homeless shelter, prompting a tweet of support from Amazon.com Inc. founder Jeff Bezos.

tech.hindustantimes.com

 

[SAJ-99]

Compromising our economic stability is a better description.

That is quite a leap.

It is literally all they talk about. It is the answer to everything.

I think you just woke up and went looking for something to be angry about. I don't hear that much talk about EV or renewables, and I'm interested in the subject. I suggest changing the channel maybe.
I agree that the government should be more cattle and less hat, but a lot of things require congressional approval and some purchases get shot down on partisan BS. On a positive note, the USPS just announced an order for 10,000 EVs. Electric isn't the answer to everything, so they also bout 40,000 ICE trucks.

Now, back to your regularly scheduled western drought.

 

[TOGIE]

Turn the empty office space into homeless shelters.....

Elon Musk wants Twitter HQ as homeless shelter; Amazon boss Jeff Bezos reacts

Elon Musk floated the idea of turning Twitter Inc.’s headquarters into a homeless shelter, prompting a tweet of support from Amazon.com Inc. founder Jeff Bezos.

tech.hindustantimes.com

we can only hope that elon tears that company to the ground. hopefully he'll set his sights on facebook next.

 

[Deleted member 28227]

Imo, I would like to see legislation to force the old boomer managers to have their telework eligible employees work from home.

This team building crap and forcing people into offices and cube farms is archaic. Just a sorry excuse for some over paid stuffed suit middle manager can pretend to stay busy babysitting 5 employees needs to end.

Less people driving to work to sit in front of a computer all day, dumps fuel demand and thus lowers price for those that really do have to drive to work.

Businesses need to rethink their strategy....if not, force them to.

Joking aside, this is a major issue. Driving for sure, but also powering/heating cooling massive buildings, also flying. I know that a lot of companies are starting to go back to flying a lot... I have a lot of friends who were flying 3+ days a week. We can't and shouldn't go back to that.

 

[Deleted member 18333]

Imo, I would like to see legislation to force the old boomer managers to have their telework eligible employees work from home.

This team building crap and forcing people into offices and cube farms is archaic. Just a sorry excuse for some over paid stuffed suit middle manager can pretend to stay busy babysitting 5 employees needs to end.

Less people driving to work to sit in front of a computer all day, dumps fuel demand and thus lowers price for those that really do have to drive to work.

Businesses need to rethink their strategy....if not, force them to.

On board with companies rethinking their office worker strategy. Not on board with government mandates.

 

[BigHornRam]

we can only hope that elon tears that company to the ground. hopefully he'll set his sights on facebook next.

Looks to me like he has the tweeters by the short hairs, going to be fun! Facebook doesn't need any help imploding.

 

[TOGIE]

Looks to me like he has the tweeters by the short hairs, going to be fun! Facebook doesn't need any help imploding.

actually, nevermind, i just remembered i bought a small slice of facebook on the russia invasion/sanction/meta earnings call dip. to the moon zuck, to the moon.

 

[Deleted member 28227]

On board with companies rethinking their office worker strategy. Not on board with government mandates.

What about a tax?

Something like, 10% fixed on office space for non-industrial/ retail service companies with head counts over 20.

 

[Deleted member 18333]

What about a tax?

Something like, 10% fixed on office space for non-industrial/ retail service companies with head counts over 20.

Government intervention is not required/needed for every issue faced in the US.

 

[Dave N]

What about a tax?

Something like, 10% fixed on office space for non-industrial/ retail service companies with head counts over 20.

We'll just pay for it in the trickle-down.

 

[BuzzH]

Probably...and I can tell you the last 2 years have been nice for my union president responsibilities as well.

With people at home working, instead of worrying about the person in the next cube and sniping at each

On board with companies rethinking their office worker strategy. Not on board with government mandates.

Give them a choice...pay a higher tax rate as a company if you have employees that you're forcing to work in the office when they could work remote.

Let them work remote, you avoid the higher tax rate.

 

[Deleted member 18333]

Give them a choice...pay a higher tax rate as a company if you have employees that you're forcing to work in the office when they could work remote.

Let them work remote, you avoid the higher tax rate.

Forcing to work in the office? 130 employees here and not a one of us is forced to be here.

Seems with the great resignation over the last 2 years there are many options for people.

I would love to see the "able to work from home matrix" that the Federal Government would come up with.

 

[Nick87]

What about a tax?

Something like, 10% fixed on office space for non-industrial/ retail service companies with head counts over 20.

Same difference.

 

[Deleted member 28227]

Government intervention is not required/needed for every issue faced in the US.

Agreed.

But it seems like the "no gobment" crowd loves their supply side intervention just not the demand side.

There are basically three paths...

1. Do nothing. If oil goes too high, demand will slacken... folks won't go on those cross country elk hunts

2. Supply intervention, this could be SPR releases, gas tax rebates, demanding fed leases be drilled whatever. Essentially it allows folks to stick to their usage habits demand stays at the same rate. (Net effect debt)

3. Demand intervention, work from home, some sort of aircraft rules, rationing etc. This drops the prices buy reducing the demand for supply, people hate it because it limits their fun and lifestyle, folks hate getting told what to do. (Net effect bad poll numbers)

We always do 2 because politicians are weenies, 1 makes the most sense if your actually a capitalist, 3 is what is best for conservation/environment/ etc. It's essentially what Carter wanted to do and why he got hammered by people.

Personally I think 3 is what I lean towards, I will settle for 1., but mostly likely we go for 2 because people are selfish.

 

[Deleted member 28227]

Why do people want more commuting, serious question?

Lots of jobs require you to be on site, but why not have 1/2 as many cars on the road... do you hate yourself lol

 

[TOGIE]

Why do people want more commuting, serious question?

Lots of jobs require you to be on site, but why not have 1/2 as many cars on the road... do you hate yourself lol

it's one of the single biggest wastes of societal resources - time, money, resources, you name it. just maniacal is what it is.

putting millions of cars on the road in each metro area, with one person in each car, at the same time two times a day, to go sit at a f*&*ing computer is quite literally the most f&*%ing asinine, stupid, unbelievable drain on society we've ever come up with.

 

[Deleted member 18333]

Agreed.

But it seems like the "no gobment" crowd loves their supply side intervention just not the demand side.

There are basically three paths...

1. Do nothing. If oil goes too high, demand will slacken... folks won't go on those cross country elk hunts

2. Supply intervention, this could be SPR releases, gas tax rebates, demanding fed leases be drilled whatever. Essentially it allows folks to stick to their usage habits demand stays at the same rate. (Net effect debt)

3. Demand intervention, work from home, some sort of aircraft rules, rationing etc. This drops the prices buy reducing the demand for supply, people hate it because it limits their fun and lifestyle, folks hate getting told what to do. (Net effect bad poll numbers)

We always do 2 because politicians are weenies, 1 makes the most sense if your actually a capitalist, 3 is what is best for conservation/environment/ etc. It's essentially what Carter wanted to do and why he got hammered by people.

Personally I think 3 is what we should do but is unlikely, I will settle for 1., but mostly likely we go for 2 because people are selfish.

They sure do and much of that is just as foolish. Energy policy based on the price of oil at any one point in time seems foolish to me as well. I am definitely not a no government person. Would like to see it smaller but I think the Government does some things very well, some things adequate and a lot of things poorly. All things are done inefficiently.

IMO number 1 is the only solution that results in rational change in the long term.

Personally feel the investor class' demand for meaningless ESG stats has driven us into this hole and that shows no sign of letting up.