Fuck the fuel demand, do so there are fewer people on the road when I’m trying to commute to my job that **can’t** be done remotely.
neanderthalman on
I have an additional, better idea
Tax *employers* over a certain size (as is standard) based on the length of each employee’s commute.
Employers know employee’s addresses. The government knows these too. Distances can be trivially auto-calculated in software these days.
Distance is zero if the employee works from home.
Waive the tax on employers if employees self-report on *their* taxes that they commute by transit, bike, walk, or EV.
This places these societal costs in those most responsible for them, and most capable of implementing changes. We mere peasants don’t have the power they have.
In addition to the immediate win from WFH policies, employers could:
– Preferentially hire local talent
– Offer moving incentives to distant talent
– Relocate near talent pools
– Relocate near transit
– Lobby local government to improve local transit
– Lobby local government to make their area more walkable
– Lobby local government to make their area more attractive for talent to live in
– Offer transit passes
– Offer EV incentives
– Offer shuttle services
– Provide shower/locker/storage for cyclists
– Modify business practices to increase WFH in the future
These are all things that companies could do, but workers can’t. And companies wont do these things without a financial incentive.
And there’s more. This is just what springs from the imagination of one idiot on the internet. Imagine what whole teams of idiots with MBAs can come up with.
Take the tax revenue from this and use it to reduce fuel taxes, particularly on diesel, which will help blunt the rising costs incurred for shipping goods due to fuel prices. As well as being something of a give-and-take to the companies themselves.
Use *that* to promote this taxation scheme as ‘revenue neutral’ to voters.
TheInfelicitousDandy on
Good for fuel, good for congestion, good for the environment, good for employees, but bad for landlords. Tough call.
Hongxiquan on
Other than the tax rules shit and information security there shouldn’t be a reason why people can’t work from home.
beardum on
Can the union form a cogent argument that isn’t just a reaction to what’s happening right this very moment? This is never going to stand up to any sort of counter argument. If public servants commuting impacts fuel prices writ large then sure, use this argument. Otherwise concentrate on ones that will actually accomplish something. This is a waste of time.
5 Comments
Fuck the fuel demand, do so there are fewer people on the road when I’m trying to commute to my job that **can’t** be done remotely.
I have an additional, better idea
Tax *employers* over a certain size (as is standard) based on the length of each employee’s commute.
Employers know employee’s addresses. The government knows these too. Distances can be trivially auto-calculated in software these days.
Distance is zero if the employee works from home.
Waive the tax on employers if employees self-report on *their* taxes that they commute by transit, bike, walk, or EV.
This places these societal costs in those most responsible for them, and most capable of implementing changes. We mere peasants don’t have the power they have.
In addition to the immediate win from WFH policies, employers could:
– Preferentially hire local talent
– Offer moving incentives to distant talent
– Relocate near talent pools
– Relocate near transit
– Lobby local government to improve local transit
– Lobby local government to make their area more walkable
– Lobby local government to make their area more attractive for talent to live in
– Offer transit passes
– Offer EV incentives
– Offer shuttle services
– Provide shower/locker/storage for cyclists
– Modify business practices to increase WFH in the future
These are all things that companies could do, but workers can’t. And companies wont do these things without a financial incentive.
And there’s more. This is just what springs from the imagination of one idiot on the internet. Imagine what whole teams of idiots with MBAs can come up with.
Take the tax revenue from this and use it to reduce fuel taxes, particularly on diesel, which will help blunt the rising costs incurred for shipping goods due to fuel prices. As well as being something of a give-and-take to the companies themselves.
Use *that* to promote this taxation scheme as ‘revenue neutral’ to voters.
Good for fuel, good for congestion, good for the environment, good for employees, but bad for landlords. Tough call.
Other than the tax rules shit and information security there shouldn’t be a reason why people can’t work from home.
Can the union form a cogent argument that isn’t just a reaction to what’s happening right this very moment? This is never going to stand up to any sort of counter argument. If public servants commuting impacts fuel prices writ large then sure, use this argument. Otherwise concentrate on ones that will actually accomplish something. This is a waste of time.