We're Not Wrong, We Just Need to Redouble Our Efforts

They're leaving, ergo build houses and trains! (WSJ graphic)

Conservatives do it, too, but lately Progressives are so wedded to failing policies that they can't see the absurdity of what they're saying.

For example, here's an opinion piece from the Chronicle editorial page: How working from home could actually make Bay Area traffic worse

[Chronicle editorial writer Matthew Fleischer] reached out to California State Sen. Scott Wiener to see if the prospect of permanent work from home had altered his thinking around ambitious housing plans to densify San Francisco and other job-rich areas. Do we still need dense housing near offices if people are staying home?

“Absolutely,” he said. “If we want to have any chance of meeting our climate goals we do.”

The argument goes something like this: workers move to the suburbs where they're safer from infection and can get more square footage for the money, but when the economy revives they'll have longer commutes to work. Mass transit from the hinterlands is sparse, so there will be more greenhouse gas emissions when they drive in.

It only takes a minute to come up with counter-arguments:

1) But they won't be driving in! Do the analysis: how often will the working-from-home (WFH) employee come to the office? If it's one day a week the incremental pollution is negligible. Also, that will be one less resident who will be using expensive, crowded, unreliable SF Muni.

2) But they won't be coming into the City! Employers are leaving San Francisco for cheaper digs in the suburbs, where taxes and regulations are lower. Some big ones, like Oracle and HP, are leaving the State. The new commute will be out in the 'burbs, at short distances, and won't strain your precious City services.

3) But there won't be greenhouse gases! The State has banned the sale of gasoline-powered vehicles after 2034. In 14 years transportation CO2 is guaranteed to decrease. There's no urgency in pushing through expensive dense housing and mass transit for the sake of climate change, since driving EVs into the City won't add to greenhouse gas emissions. And don't say that the next 14 years are critical, because environmentalists were claiming 21 years ago that snowfalls were a thing of the past. A lot of people remember that one.

By the way, England is on for its coldest May since record-keeping began in 1659 (during the Maunder minimum).

4) Expensive multiyear projects fail in times of rapid technological and demographic change---look at the wasted $billions from the high-speed rail project that won't ever be completed. Don't break ground on any new construction unless you're extremely confident that the demand is there. Freeway traffic still moves at the speed limit during rush hour, and it's an open question whether housing is needed for San Francisco and other cities where people have left.

Finally, I'll just go ahead and say it because comedians don't ever make jokes about their own side:

Progressives want to free chickens from the crowded coops and let them roam free. As for people, just the opposite.