Comment

Comment by Mountain_Skies

I was very involved with public transit activism for two decades. One of the most disappointing things about the switch to remote work during the pandemic is how many of my friends I met through transit activism have turned against WFH. We used to push for "commute alternatives" of which both transit and work from home were just two of a range of alternatives. But it turns out much of that was simple lip service to transit alternatives that were easy to support because they weren't widely adopted. Once WFH suddenly gained a large chunk of market share, they got very hostile to it. Transit became the one and only acceptable choice. Turned out that many weren't motivated by wanting to have less dependence on private automobiles that clog up and pollute cities but rather they have a vision of everyone living in dense high rise buildings clustered together in city centers. Even though WFH helps unclog city streets and cleans the air, it is now considered bad because it goes against the ultimate goal of dense cities with plentiful transit to get around within the city. If people can live in low population density areas while eliminating 90% of the miles driven per year, that's considered a bad thing because it doesn't support the urban vision they have that can only work if alternatives aren't allowed to exist. Quite disappointing.

Discussion

Live from the official Hacker News API

A modern reader for Hacker News · SvelteKit + Skeleton