Real talk about the city’s economy, federal buildings leases, and telework impacts

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The D.C. Fiscal Policy institute estimates that if D.C. were a state, it would have a net gain of $1 billion (it would be able to tax commuters, among other revenue changes, which would more than offset the additional costs of operating state services the feds currently pay for): https://www.dcfpi.org/all/the-high-cost-of-denying-statehood-to-the-district-of-columbia/

DCGPI also said DC could afford to expand entitlements funded by a national leading income tax increase. So they don’t have a lot of credibility.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If telework is indeed here to stay, my prediction is that the DC area will weather this better than many other cities and states.

If people keep resisting requests/commands to head back to the office and continue to insist they are just as productive at home, at some point corporate leaders will simply offshore those jobs. They did this before with blue collar jobs; they will do it to knowledge workers. Why pay for an accountant/graphic designer/engineer in the US, when you can hire one for a 1/10 of the cost and without pesky employment regulations in Costa Rica or Ghana or India? Even if these employees are (initially) less productive, they will cost so much less that it won't matter. The tax revenue consequences of this will be felt throughout the country.

The safest jobs are going to be jobs that cannot be outsourced: service jobs, professional jobs that require physical interaction (e.g., some doctors), the military, and many government jobs. The latter will make the DC area more offshore-proof than the rest of the country.

In addition, vengeful Republicans will eventually force federal government employees back to the office. They will be delighted at upsetting what they perceive to be lazy government workers. Which will help DC and surrounding areas.

Every time I have been downtown it seems quite busy. Also, I agree that the “vengeful” Republicans are going to force federal workers back into the office. It is only a matter of time.

The House already has a bill introduced by GOP sponsors to end federal telework, as it happens.

Will it pass the Senate? And even if it does, can it reverse or supersede signed bargaining agreements? Not sure it can, on either of those questions.

It’s not likely this will pass the Senate unless it gets included in the debt ceiling package or something like that. The most likely outcome would probably be to lead more agencies to move to the suburbs and that’s likely to happen anyway.

Yep. GSA won't allow my agency to justify new leases or buildings in DC because of the cost savings in PG, Alexandria, and Fairfax.

If more fed agencies move out, wouldn’t that mean a federal city (at least one as big as it is now) is unnecessary? Wouldn’t the exit of more federal agencies bolster DC’s chances of statehood?

The people objecting to DC's statehood by citing the number of government jobs in the city aren't arguing in good faith. They object to DC statehood because the city votes for Democrats by a 80 point margins. Their stated reasoning is merely intellectual window dressing.

Perhaps. But politics aside, the strongest argument against statehood is that DC has not sufficiently proven that it can govern itself.

And Mississippi has? Please . . .

The government of Mississippi hasn’t been taken over by the Feseral government since reconstruction. So objectively yes, they have a longer track record of successful self-government than DC.

Mississippi is a ward of the state. It receives way more tax dollars that it pays. It cannot even provide portable drinking water to the citizens of its largest city. The Feds had to step in

Not sure you want to play the federal dependency game. DC is screaming that it’s going to go broke because federal workers are only going to the office 1-2 days per week.

Do you have issues with reading comprehension or do you deliberately misinterpret public statements to suit your silly agenda?

The whole point of this thread is that DC is angry at the WH for not forcing federal employees back to the office 3 days per week because unless they do it will destroy the city’s economy. DCs own head of economic development said that the federal government is directly responsible for 25% of DCs economy. And you want to talk about Mississippi? Last I checked Mississippi hasn’t care one way or another if the federal government works from home or not because their whole economy is not dependent on the Federal government.

Bowser asked the Feds to either return to the office OR give up the huge amount of office space currently sitting idle so that it could be repurposed. Sh*t or get off the pot, in common parlance.

The point about Mississippi was that DC seems to govern itself a hell of a lot better than states that, among other severe failures of governance, can't even provide clean drinking water to residents of their own capital city.

Not quite the apt analogy. DC said send back the workers or give us the land (for free). That's sh*t or give me your bathroom.

Does DC provide clean drinking water?

https://www.nrdc.org/experts/valerie-baron/hiding-plain-view-dc-waters-data-suggests-contamination

I’m a bit hazy on this but I believe those lead pipes were put before DC was given home rule.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If telework is indeed here to stay, my prediction is that the DC area will weather this better than many other cities and states.

If people keep resisting requests/commands to head back to the office and continue to insist they are just as productive at home, at some point corporate leaders will simply offshore those jobs. They did this before with blue collar jobs; they will do it to knowledge workers. Why pay for an accountant/graphic designer/engineer in the US, when you can hire one for a 1/10 of the cost and without pesky employment regulations in Costa Rica or Ghana or India? Even if these employees are (initially) less productive, they will cost so much less that it won't matter. The tax revenue consequences of this will be felt throughout the country.

The safest jobs are going to be jobs that cannot be outsourced: service jobs, professional jobs that require physical interaction (e.g., some doctors), the military, and many government jobs. The latter will make the DC area more offshore-proof than the rest of the country.

In addition, vengeful Republicans will eventually force federal government employees back to the office. They will be delighted at upsetting what they perceive to be lazy government workers. Which will help DC and surrounding areas.

Every time I have been downtown it seems quite busy. Also, I agree that the “vengeful” Republicans are going to force federal workers back into the office. It is only a matter of time.

The House already has a bill introduced by GOP sponsors to end federal telework, as it happens.

Will it pass the Senate? And even if it does, can it reverse or supersede signed bargaining agreements? Not sure it can, on either of those questions.

It’s not likely this will pass the Senate unless it gets included in the debt ceiling package or something like that. The most likely outcome would probably be to lead more agencies to move to the suburbs and that’s likely to happen anyway.

Yep. GSA won't allow my agency to justify new leases or buildings in DC because of the cost savings in PG, Alexandria, and Fairfax.

If more fed agencies move out, wouldn’t that mean a federal city (at least one as big as it is now) is unnecessary? Wouldn’t the exit of more federal agencies bolster DC’s chances of statehood?

The people objecting to DC's statehood by citing the number of government jobs in the city aren't arguing in good faith. They object to DC statehood because the city votes for Democrats by a 80 point margins. Their stated reasoning is merely intellectual window dressing.

Perhaps. But politics aside, the strongest argument against statehood is that DC has not sufficiently proven that it can govern itself.

And Mississippi has? Please . . .

The government of Mississippi hasn’t been taken over by the Feseral government since reconstruction. So objectively yes, they have a longer track record of successful self-government than DC.

Mississippi is a ward of the state. It receives way more tax dollars that it pays. It cannot even provide portable drinking water to the citizens of its largest city. The Feds had to step in

Not sure you want to play the federal dependency game. DC is screaming that it’s going to go broke because federal workers are only going to the office 1-2 days per week.

Do you have issues with reading comprehension or do you deliberately misinterpret public statements to suit your silly agenda?

The whole point of this thread is that DC is angry at the WH for not forcing federal employees back to the office 3 days per week because unless they do it will destroy the city’s economy. DCs own head of economic development said that the federal government is directly responsible for 25% of DCs economy. And you want to talk about Mississippi? Last I checked Mississippi hasn’t care one way or another if the federal government works from home or not because their whole economy is not dependent on the Federal government.

Bowser asked the Feds to either return to the office OR give up the huge amount of office space currently sitting idle so that it could be repurposed. Sh*t or get off the pot, in common parlance.

The point about Mississippi was that DC seems to govern itself a hell of a lot better than states that, among other severe failures of governance, can't even provide clean drinking water to residents of their own capital city.

Not quite the apt analogy. DC said send back the workers or give us the land (for free). That's sh*t or give me your bathroom.

Does DC provide clean drinking water?

https://www.nrdc.org/experts/valerie-baron/hiding-plain-view-dc-waters-data-suggests-contamination

I’m a bit hazy on this but I believe those lead pipes were put before DC was given home rule.

The fact that DC Water is currently funded by the Federal government is a good reason against statehood. What state cannot manage its own water supply?

Relatedly, what state cannot manage its own criminal justice and judicial system?

Lastly, what state doesn’t even bother to fund a reasonable accredited state university?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If telework is indeed here to stay, my prediction is that the DC area will weather this better than many other cities and states.

If people keep resisting requests/commands to head back to the office and continue to insist they are just as productive at home, at some point corporate leaders will simply offshore those jobs. They did this before with blue collar jobs; they will do it to knowledge workers. Why pay for an accountant/graphic designer/engineer in the US, when you can hire one for a 1/10 of the cost and without pesky employment regulations in Costa Rica or Ghana or India? Even if these employees are (initially) less productive, they will cost so much less that it won't matter. The tax revenue consequences of this will be felt throughout the country.

The safest jobs are going to be jobs that cannot be outsourced: service jobs, professional jobs that require physical interaction (e.g., some doctors), the military, and many government jobs. The latter will make the DC area more offshore-proof than the rest of the country.

In addition, vengeful Republicans will eventually force federal government employees back to the office. They will be delighted at upsetting what they perceive to be lazy government workers. Which will help DC and surrounding areas.

Every time I have been downtown it seems quite busy. Also, I agree that the “vengeful” Republicans are going to force federal workers back into the office. It is only a matter of time.

The House already has a bill introduced by GOP sponsors to end federal telework, as it happens.

Will it pass the Senate? And even if it does, can it reverse or supersede signed bargaining agreements? Not sure it can, on either of those questions.

It’s not likely this will pass the Senate unless it gets included in the debt ceiling package or something like that. The most likely outcome would probably be to lead more agencies to move to the suburbs and that’s likely to happen anyway.

Yep. GSA won't allow my agency to justify new leases or buildings in DC because of the cost savings in PG, Alexandria, and Fairfax.

If more fed agencies move out, wouldn’t that mean a federal city (at least one as big as it is now) is unnecessary? Wouldn’t the exit of more federal agencies bolster DC’s chances of statehood?

The people objecting to DC's statehood by citing the number of government jobs in the city aren't arguing in good faith. They object to DC statehood because the city votes for Democrats by a 80 point margins. Their stated reasoning is merely intellectual window dressing.

Perhaps. But politics aside, the strongest argument against statehood is that DC has not sufficiently proven that it can govern itself.

And Mississippi has? Please . . .

The government of Mississippi hasn’t been taken over by the Feseral government since reconstruction. So objectively yes, they have a longer track record of successful self-government than DC.

Mississippi is a ward of the state. It receives way more tax dollars that it pays. It cannot even provide portable drinking water to the citizens of its largest city. The Feds had to step in

Not sure you want to play the federal dependency game. DC is screaming that it’s going to go broke because federal workers are only going to the office 1-2 days per week.

Do you have issues with reading comprehension or do you deliberately misinterpret public statements to suit your silly agenda?

The whole point of this thread is that DC is angry at the WH for not forcing federal employees back to the office 3 days per week because unless they do it will destroy the city’s economy. DCs own head of economic development said that the federal government is directly responsible for 25% of DCs economy. And you want to talk about Mississippi? Last I checked Mississippi hasn’t care one way or another if the federal government works from home or not because their whole economy is not dependent on the Federal government.

Bowser asked the Feds to either return to the office OR give up the huge amount of office space currently sitting idle so that it could be repurposed. Sh*t or get off the pot, in common parlance.

The point about Mississippi was that DC seems to govern itself a hell of a lot better than states that, among other severe failures of governance, can't even provide clean drinking water to residents of their own capital city.

Not quite the apt analogy. DC said send back the workers or give us the land (for free). That's sh*t or give me your bathroom.

Does DC provide clean drinking water?

https://www.nrdc.org/experts/valerie-baron/hiding-plain-view-dc-waters-data-suggests-contamination

I’m a bit hazy on this but I believe those lead pipes were put before DC was given home rule.

The fact that DC Water is currently funded by the Federal government is a good reason against statehood. What state cannot manage its own water supply?

Relatedly, what state cannot manage its own criminal justice and judicial system?

Lastly, what state doesn’t even bother to fund a reasonable accredited state university?

DC Water is funded by DC water users. I wish the federal government would take it over though and lower my water bills.

But the federal government funds infrastructure projects across the country paid for by federal taxes. Not sure why you think DC is exceptional in that sphere.

Almost everyone in DC government and public safety would be perfectly happy for the city to be provided the same autonomy over criminal prosecutions enjoyed by everywhere else in America.

Maybe DC can get an accredited state university when it actually becomes a state.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If telework is indeed here to stay, my prediction is that the DC area will weather this better than many other cities and states.

If people keep resisting requests/commands to head back to the office and continue to insist they are just as productive at home, at some point corporate leaders will simply offshore those jobs. They did this before with blue collar jobs; they will do it to knowledge workers. Why pay for an accountant/graphic designer/engineer in the US, when you can hire one for a 1/10 of the cost and without pesky employment regulations in Costa Rica or Ghana or India? Even if these employees are (initially) less productive, they will cost so much less that it won't matter. The tax revenue consequences of this will be felt throughout the country.

The safest jobs are going to be jobs that cannot be outsourced: service jobs, professional jobs that require physical interaction (e.g., some doctors), the military, and many government jobs. The latter will make the DC area more offshore-proof than the rest of the country.

In addition, vengeful Republicans will eventually force federal government employees back to the office. They will be delighted at upsetting what they perceive to be lazy government workers. Which will help DC and surrounding areas.

Every time I have been downtown it seems quite busy. Also, I agree that the “vengeful” Republicans are going to force federal workers back into the office. It is only a matter of time.

The House already has a bill introduced by GOP sponsors to end federal telework, as it happens.

Will it pass the Senate? And even if it does, can it reverse or supersede signed bargaining agreements? Not sure it can, on either of those questions.

It’s not likely this will pass the Senate unless it gets included in the debt ceiling package or something like that. The most likely outcome would probably be to lead more agencies to move to the suburbs and that’s likely to happen anyway.

Yep. GSA won't allow my agency to justify new leases or buildings in DC because of the cost savings in PG, Alexandria, and Fairfax.

If more fed agencies move out, wouldn’t that mean a federal city (at least one as big as it is now) is unnecessary? Wouldn’t the exit of more federal agencies bolster DC’s chances of statehood?

The people objecting to DC's statehood by citing the number of government jobs in the city aren't arguing in good faith. They object to DC statehood because the city votes for Democrats by a 80 point margins. Their stated reasoning is merely intellectual window dressing.

Perhaps. But politics aside, the strongest argument against statehood is that DC has not sufficiently proven that it can govern itself.

And Mississippi has? Please . . .

The government of Mississippi hasn’t been taken over by the Feseral government since reconstruction. So objectively yes, they have a longer track record of successful self-government than DC.

Mississippi is a ward of the state. It receives way more tax dollars that it pays. It cannot even provide portable drinking water to the citizens of its largest city. The Feds had to step in

Not sure you want to play the federal dependency game. DC is screaming that it’s going to go broke because federal workers are only going to the office 1-2 days per week.

Do you have issues with reading comprehension or do you deliberately misinterpret public statements to suit your silly agenda?

The whole point of this thread is that DC is angry at the WH for not forcing federal employees back to the office 3 days per week because unless they do it will destroy the city’s economy. DCs own head of economic development said that the federal government is directly responsible for 25% of DCs economy. And you want to talk about Mississippi? Last I checked Mississippi hasn’t care one way or another if the federal government works from home or not because their whole economy is not dependent on the Federal government.

Bowser asked the Feds to either return to the office OR give up the huge amount of office space currently sitting idle so that it could be repurposed. Sh*t or get off the pot, in common parlance.

The point about Mississippi was that DC seems to govern itself a hell of a lot better than states that, among other severe failures of governance, can't even provide clean drinking water to residents of their own capital city.

Not quite the apt analogy. DC said send back the workers or give us the land (for free). That's sh*t or give me your bathroom.

Does DC provide clean drinking water?

https://www.nrdc.org/experts/valerie-baron/hiding-plain-view-dc-waters-data-suggests-contamination

I’m a bit hazy on this but I believe those lead pipes were put before DC was given home rule.

The fact that DC Water is currently funded by the Federal government is a good reason against statehood. What state cannot manage its own water supply?

Relatedly, what state cannot manage its own criminal justice and judicial system?

Lastly, what state doesn’t even bother to fund a reasonable accredited state university?

D.C. doesn’t fund its judicial system because there is no state government here. What city funds its own judicial system? Every proposal for statehood involves shifting that cost to D.C.

Same with universities. What city has its own? (Yes, New York used to, but now it’s part of CUNY.)

No idea what you’re talking about with D.C. Water — it gets some money from the federal government via grants, like every water system in the country, but it’s mostly funded by D.C. ratepayers.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The D.C. Fiscal Policy institute estimates that if D.C. were a state, it would have a net gain of $1 billion (it would be able to tax commuters, among other revenue changes, which would more than offset the additional costs of operating state services the feds currently pay for): https://www.dcfpi.org/all/the-high-cost-of-denying-statehood-to-the-district-of-columbia/

DCGPI also said DC could afford to expand entitlements funded by a national leading income tax increase. So they don’t have a lot of credibility.

We probably could afford to expand entitlements if we increased income taxes. The fact that you don’t want income taxes raised doesn’t mean the financial analysis behind the idea lacks credibility.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If telework is indeed here to stay, my prediction is that the DC area will weather this better than many other cities and states.

If people keep resisting requests/commands to head back to the office and continue to insist they are just as productive at home, at some point corporate leaders will simply offshore those jobs. They did this before with blue collar jobs; they will do it to knowledge workers. Why pay for an accountant/graphic designer/engineer in the US, when you can hire one for a 1/10 of the cost and without pesky employment regulations in Costa Rica or Ghana or India? Even if these employees are (initially) less productive, they will cost so much less that it won't matter. The tax revenue consequences of this will be felt throughout the country.

The safest jobs are going to be jobs that cannot be outsourced: service jobs, professional jobs that require physical interaction (e.g., some doctors), the military, and many government jobs. The latter will make the DC area more offshore-proof than the rest of the country.

In addition, vengeful Republicans will eventually force federal government employees back to the office. They will be delighted at upsetting what they perceive to be lazy government workers. Which will help DC and surrounding areas.

Every time I have been downtown it seems quite busy. Also, I agree that the “vengeful” Republicans are going to force federal workers back into the office. It is only a matter of time.

The House already has a bill introduced by GOP sponsors to end federal telework, as it happens.

Will it pass the Senate? And even if it does, can it reverse or supersede signed bargaining agreements? Not sure it can, on either of those questions.

It’s not likely this will pass the Senate unless it gets included in the debt ceiling package or something like that. The most likely outcome would probably be to lead more agencies to move to the suburbs and that’s likely to happen anyway.

Yep. GSA won't allow my agency to justify new leases or buildings in DC because of the cost savings in PG, Alexandria, and Fairfax.

If more fed agencies move out, wouldn’t that mean a federal city (at least one as big as it is now) is unnecessary? Wouldn’t the exit of more federal agencies bolster DC’s chances of statehood?

The people objecting to DC's statehood by citing the number of government jobs in the city aren't arguing in good faith. They object to DC statehood because the city votes for Democrats by a 80 point margins. Their stated reasoning is merely intellectual window dressing.

Perhaps. But politics aside, the strongest argument against statehood is that DC has not sufficiently proven that it can govern itself.

And Mississippi has? Please . . .

The government of Mississippi hasn’t been taken over by the Feseral government since reconstruction. So objectively yes, they have a longer track record of successful self-government than DC.

Mississippi is a ward of the state. It receives way more tax dollars that it pays. It cannot even provide portable drinking water to the citizens of its largest city. The Feds had to step in

Not sure you want to play the federal dependency game. DC is screaming that it’s going to go broke because federal workers are only going to the office 1-2 days per week.

Do you have issues with reading comprehension or do you deliberately misinterpret public statements to suit your silly agenda?

The whole point of this thread is that DC is angry at the WH for not forcing federal employees back to the office 3 days per week because unless they do it will destroy the city’s economy. DCs own head of economic development said that the federal government is directly responsible for 25% of DCs economy. And you want to talk about Mississippi? Last I checked Mississippi hasn’t care one way or another if the federal government works from home or not because their whole economy is not dependent on the Federal government.

Bowser asked the Feds to either return to the office OR give up the huge amount of office space currently sitting idle so that it could be repurposed. Sh*t or get off the pot, in common parlance.

The point about Mississippi was that DC seems to govern itself a hell of a lot better than states that, among other severe failures of governance, can't even provide clean drinking water to residents of their own capital city.

Not quite the apt analogy. DC said send back the workers or give us the land (for free). That's sh*t or give me your bathroom.

Does DC provide clean drinking water?

https://www.nrdc.org/experts/valerie-baron/hiding-plain-view-dc-waters-data-suggests-contamination

I’m a bit hazy on this but I believe those lead pipes were put before DC was given home rule.

The argument was that DC supplies clean drinking water.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If telework is indeed here to stay, my prediction is that the DC area will weather this better than many other cities and states.

If people keep resisting requests/commands to head back to the office and continue to insist they are just as productive at home, at some point corporate leaders will simply offshore those jobs. They did this before with blue collar jobs; they will do it to knowledge workers. Why pay for an accountant/graphic designer/engineer in the US, when you can hire one for a 1/10 of the cost and without pesky employment regulations in Costa Rica or Ghana or India? Even if these employees are (initially) less productive, they will cost so much less that it won't matter. The tax revenue consequences of this will be felt throughout the country.

The safest jobs are going to be jobs that cannot be outsourced: service jobs, professional jobs that require physical interaction (e.g., some doctors), the military, and many government jobs. The latter will make the DC area more offshore-proof than the rest of the country.

In addition, vengeful Republicans will eventually force federal government employees back to the office. They will be delighted at upsetting what they perceive to be lazy government workers. Which will help DC and surrounding areas.

Every time I have been downtown it seems quite busy. Also, I agree that the “vengeful” Republicans are going to force federal workers back into the office. It is only a matter of time.

The House already has a bill introduced by GOP sponsors to end federal telework, as it happens.

Will it pass the Senate? And even if it does, can it reverse or supersede signed bargaining agreements? Not sure it can, on either of those questions.

It’s not likely this will pass the Senate unless it gets included in the debt ceiling package or something like that. The most likely outcome would probably be to lead more agencies to move to the suburbs and that’s likely to happen anyway.

Yep. GSA won't allow my agency to justify new leases or buildings in DC because of the cost savings in PG, Alexandria, and Fairfax.

If more fed agencies move out, wouldn’t that mean a federal city (at least one as big as it is now) is unnecessary? Wouldn’t the exit of more federal agencies bolster DC’s chances of statehood?

The people objecting to DC's statehood by citing the number of government jobs in the city aren't arguing in good faith. They object to DC statehood because the city votes for Democrats by a 80 point margins. Their stated reasoning is merely intellectual window dressing.

Perhaps. But politics aside, the strongest argument against statehood is that DC has not sufficiently proven that it can govern itself.

And Mississippi has? Please . . .

The government of Mississippi hasn’t been taken over by the Feseral government since reconstruction. So objectively yes, they have a longer track record of successful self-government than DC.

Mississippi is a ward of the state. It receives way more tax dollars that it pays. It cannot even provide portable drinking water to the citizens of its largest city. The Feds had to step in

Not sure you want to play the federal dependency game. DC is screaming that it’s going to go broke because federal workers are only going to the office 1-2 days per week.

Do you have issues with reading comprehension or do you deliberately misinterpret public statements to suit your silly agenda?

The whole point of this thread is that DC is angry at the WH for not forcing federal employees back to the office 3 days per week because unless they do it will destroy the city’s economy. DCs own head of economic development said that the federal government is directly responsible for 25% of DCs economy. And you want to talk about Mississippi? Last I checked Mississippi hasn’t care one way or another if the federal government works from home or not because their whole economy is not dependent on the Federal government.

Bowser asked the Feds to either return to the office OR give up the huge amount of office space currently sitting idle so that it could be repurposed. Sh*t or get off the pot, in common parlance.

The point about Mississippi was that DC seems to govern itself a hell of a lot better than states that, among other severe failures of governance, can't even provide clean drinking water to residents of their own capital city.

Not quite the apt analogy. DC said send back the workers or give us the land (for free). That's sh*t or give me your bathroom.

Does DC provide clean drinking water?

https://www.nrdc.org/experts/valerie-baron/hiding-plain-view-dc-waters-data-suggests-contamination

I’m a bit hazy on this but I believe those lead pipes were put before DC was given home rule.

The argument was that DC supplies clean drinking water.

The point was that DC’s issues with lead piping - unlike, say, the issues that Jackson, MS is having with drinking water - hardly demonstrate that the city can’t govern itself but are rather a legacy of the city’s management by the federal government.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The D.C. Fiscal Policy institute estimates that if D.C. were a state, it would have a net gain of $1 billion (it would be able to tax commuters, among other revenue changes, which would more than offset the additional costs of operating state services the feds currently pay for): https://www.dcfpi.org/all/the-high-cost-of-denying-statehood-to-the-district-of-columbia/

DCGPI also said DC could afford to expand entitlements funded by a national leading income tax increase. So they don’t have a lot of credibility.

We probably could afford to expand entitlements if we increased income taxes. The fact that you don’t want income taxes raised doesn’t mean the financial analysis behind the idea lacks credibility.

DC has the 4th highest state income tax rate in the country, which is remarkable when you consider the other four states are: CA, HI, NY & NJ. There are no internet or finance billionaires in the city. Not even an industry that creates equivalent levels of wealth. And to make matters worse, DC has jurisdictional competition from much wealthier neighbors that doesn’t exist for those other states.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If telework is indeed here to stay, my prediction is that the DC area will weather this better than many other cities and states.

If people keep resisting requests/commands to head back to the office and continue to insist they are just as productive at home, at some point corporate leaders will simply offshore those jobs. They did this before with blue collar jobs; they will do it to knowledge workers. Why pay for an accountant/graphic designer/engineer in the US, when you can hire one for a 1/10 of the cost and without pesky employment regulations in Costa Rica or Ghana or India? Even if these employees are (initially) less productive, they will cost so much less that it won't matter. The tax revenue consequences of this will be felt throughout the country.

The safest jobs are going to be jobs that cannot be outsourced: service jobs, professional jobs that require physical interaction (e.g., some doctors), the military, and many government jobs. The latter will make the DC area more offshore-proof than the rest of the country.

In addition, vengeful Republicans will eventually force federal government employees back to the office. They will be delighted at upsetting what they perceive to be lazy government workers. Which will help DC and surrounding areas.

Every time I have been downtown it seems quite busy. Also, I agree that the “vengeful” Republicans are going to force federal workers back into the office. It is only a matter of time.

The House already has a bill introduced by GOP sponsors to end federal telework, as it happens.

Will it pass the Senate? And even if it does, can it reverse or supersede signed bargaining agreements? Not sure it can, on either of those questions.

It’s not likely this will pass the Senate unless it gets included in the debt ceiling package or something like that. The most likely outcome would probably be to lead more agencies to move to the suburbs and that’s likely to happen anyway.

Yep. GSA won't allow my agency to justify new leases or buildings in DC because of the cost savings in PG, Alexandria, and Fairfax.

If more fed agencies move out, wouldn’t that mean a federal city (at least one as big as it is now) is unnecessary? Wouldn’t the exit of more federal agencies bolster DC’s chances of statehood?

The people objecting to DC's statehood by citing the number of government jobs in the city aren't arguing in good faith. They object to DC statehood because the city votes for Democrats by a 80 point margins. Their stated reasoning is merely intellectual window dressing.

Perhaps. But politics aside, the strongest argument against statehood is that DC has not sufficiently proven that it can govern itself.

And Mississippi has? Please . . .

The government of Mississippi hasn’t been taken over by the Feseral government since reconstruction. So objectively yes, they have a longer track record of successful self-government than DC.

Mississippi is a ward of the state. It receives way more tax dollars that it pays. It cannot even provide portable drinking water to the citizens of its largest city. The Feds had to step in

Not sure you want to play the federal dependency game. DC is screaming that it’s going to go broke because federal workers are only going to the office 1-2 days per week.

Do you have issues with reading comprehension or do you deliberately misinterpret public statements to suit your silly agenda?

The whole point of this thread is that DC is angry at the WH for not forcing federal employees back to the office 3 days per week because unless they do it will destroy the city’s economy. DCs own head of economic development said that the federal government is directly responsible for 25% of DCs economy. And you want to talk about Mississippi? Last I checked Mississippi hasn’t care one way or another if the federal government works from home or not because their whole economy is not dependent on the Federal government.

Bowser asked the Feds to either return to the office OR give up the huge amount of office space currently sitting idle so that it could be repurposed. Sh*t or get off the pot, in common parlance.

The point about Mississippi was that DC seems to govern itself a hell of a lot better than states that, among other severe failures of governance, can't even provide clean drinking water to residents of their own capital city.

Not quite the apt analogy. DC said send back the workers or give us the land (for free). That's sh*t or give me your bathroom.

Does DC provide clean drinking water?

https://www.nrdc.org/experts/valerie-baron/hiding-plain-view-dc-waters-data-suggests-contamination

I’m a bit hazy on this but I believe those lead pipes were put before DC was given home rule.

The fact that DC Water is currently funded by the Federal government is a good reason against statehood. What state cannot manage its own water supply?

Relatedly, what state cannot manage its own criminal justice and judicial system?

Lastly, what state doesn’t even bother to fund a reasonable accredited state university?

D.C. doesn’t fund its judicial system because there is no state government here. What city funds its own judicial system? Every proposal for statehood involves shifting that cost to D.C.

Same with universities. What city has its own? (Yes, New York used to, but now it’s part of CUNY.)

No idea what you’re talking about with D.C. Water — it gets some money from the federal government via grants, like every water system in the country, but it’s mostly funded by D.C. ratepayers.

DC used to pay for its own courts and prison. You obviously are new here because you’ve never heard of Lorton. The federal government fully took over these functions in 1997 because DC not adequately operate these core functions.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The D.C. Fiscal Policy institute estimates that if D.C. were a state, it would have a net gain of $1 billion (it would be able to tax commuters, among other revenue changes, which would more than offset the additional costs of operating state services the feds currently pay for): https://www.dcfpi.org/all/the-high-cost-of-denying-statehood-to-the-district-of-columbia/

This study fails to account for non-residents who would continue to work in the federal enclave and remain exempt from a commuter tax. It also assumes that no private companies leave or transfer employee home offices and that Va and Md don’t retaliate, which seems unlikely.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If telework is indeed here to stay, my prediction is that the DC area will weather this better than many other cities and states.

If people keep resisting requests/commands to head back to the office and continue to insist they are just as productive at home, at some point corporate leaders will simply offshore those jobs. They did this before with blue collar jobs; they will do it to knowledge workers. Why pay for an accountant/graphic designer/engineer in the US, when you can hire one for a 1/10 of the cost and without pesky employment regulations in Costa Rica or Ghana or India? Even if these employees are (initially) less productive, they will cost so much less that it won't matter. The tax revenue consequences of this will be felt throughout the country.

The safest jobs are going to be jobs that cannot be outsourced: service jobs, professional jobs that require physical interaction (e.g., some doctors), the military, and many government jobs. The latter will make the DC area more offshore-proof than the rest of the country.

In addition, vengeful Republicans will eventually force federal government employees back to the office. They will be delighted at upsetting what they perceive to be lazy government workers. Which will help DC and surrounding areas.

Every time I have been downtown it seems quite busy. Also, I agree that the “vengeful” Republicans are going to force federal workers back into the office. It is only a matter of time.

The House already has a bill introduced by GOP sponsors to end federal telework, as it happens.

Will it pass the Senate? And even if it does, can it reverse or supersede signed bargaining agreements? Not sure it can, on either of those questions.

It’s not likely this will pass the Senate unless it gets included in the debt ceiling package or something like that. The most likely outcome would probably be to lead more agencies to move to the suburbs and that’s likely to happen anyway.

Yep. GSA won't allow my agency to justify new leases or buildings in DC because of the cost savings in PG, Alexandria, and Fairfax.

If more fed agencies move out, wouldn’t that mean a federal city (at least one as big as it is now) is unnecessary? Wouldn’t the exit of more federal agencies bolster DC’s chances of statehood?

The people objecting to DC's statehood by citing the number of government jobs in the city aren't arguing in good faith. They object to DC statehood because the city votes for Democrats by a 80 point margins. Their stated reasoning is merely intellectual window dressing.

Perhaps. But politics aside, the strongest argument against statehood is that DC has not sufficiently proven that it can govern itself.

And Mississippi has? Please . . .

The government of Mississippi hasn’t been taken over by the Feseral government since reconstruction. So objectively yes, they have a longer track record of successful self-government than DC.

Mississippi is a ward of the state. It receives way more tax dollars that it pays. It cannot even provide portable drinking water to the citizens of its largest city. The Feds had to step in

Not sure you want to play the federal dependency game. DC is screaming that it’s going to go broke because federal workers are only going to the office 1-2 days per week.

Do you have issues with reading comprehension or do you deliberately misinterpret public statements to suit your silly agenda?

The whole point of this thread is that DC is angry at the WH for not forcing federal employees back to the office 3 days per week because unless they do it will destroy the city’s economy. DCs own head of economic development said that the federal government is directly responsible for 25% of DCs economy. And you want to talk about Mississippi? Last I checked Mississippi hasn’t care one way or another if the federal government works from home or not because their whole economy is not dependent on the Federal government.

Bowser asked the Feds to either return to the office OR give up the huge amount of office space currently sitting idle so that it could be repurposed. Sh*t or get off the pot, in common parlance.

The point about Mississippi was that DC seems to govern itself a hell of a lot better than states that, among other severe failures of governance, can't even provide clean drinking water to residents of their own capital city.

Not quite the apt analogy. DC said send back the workers or give us the land (for free). That's sh*t or give me your bathroom.

Does DC provide clean drinking water?

https://www.nrdc.org/experts/valerie-baron/hiding-plain-view-dc-waters-data-suggests-contamination

I’m a bit hazy on this but I believe those lead pipes were put before DC was given home rule.

The fact that DC Water is currently funded by the Federal government is a good reason against statehood. What state cannot manage its own water supply?

Relatedly, what state cannot manage its own criminal justice and judicial system?

Lastly, what state doesn’t even bother to fund a reasonable accredited state university?

D.C. doesn’t fund its judicial system because there is no state government here. What city funds its own judicial system? Every proposal for statehood involves shifting that cost to D.C.

Same with universities. What city has its own? (Yes, New York used to, but now it’s part of CUNY.)

No idea what you’re talking about with D.C. Water — it gets some money from the federal government via grants, like every water system in the country, but it’s mostly funded by D.C. ratepayers.

DC used to pay for its own courts and prison. You obviously are new here because you’ve never heard of Lorton. The federal government fully took over these functions in 1997 because DC not adequately operate these core functions.

I am not new here. That was the same year that the federal payment, which a lot of people still seem to think the city gets, ended. The federal government took those functions over at the same time as it stopped paying the city hundreds of millions of dollars a year to operate them. Leaving that fact out does make your argument seem more persuasive, though, I'll grant you that.

I just don't think the fact that the city government of a full generation ago operated badly is cause to argue now that the District is incapable of governing itself. How has the District done in the 22 years since the city -- in conjunction with Congress, yes, I'll give you that -- passed new laws that specify how it's supposed to manage its finances?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The D.C. Fiscal Policy institute estimates that if D.C. were a state, it would have a net gain of $1 billion (it would be able to tax commuters, among other revenue changes, which would more than offset the additional costs of operating state services the feds currently pay for): https://www.dcfpi.org/all/the-high-cost-of-denying-statehood-to-the-district-of-columbia/

DCGPI also said DC could afford to expand entitlements funded by a national leading income tax increase. So they don’t have a lot of credibility.

We probably could afford to expand entitlements if we increased income taxes. The fact that you don’t want income taxes raised doesn’t mean the financial analysis behind the idea lacks credibility.

DC has the 4th highest state income tax rate in the country, which is remarkable when you consider the other four states are: CA, HI, NY & NJ. There are no internet or finance billionaires in the city. Not even an industry that creates equivalent levels of wealth. And to make matters worse, DC has jurisdictional competition from much wealthier neighbors that doesn’t exist for those other states.

Those are political arguments, not financial arguments, and they probably explain why the city has not raised income taxes to be the highest in the country. As for remarkable tax rates, D.C. has the highest median income among states and territories, so it's not exactly shocking that we also have high tax rates.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If telework is indeed here to stay, my prediction is that the DC area will weather this better than many other cities and states.

If people keep resisting requests/commands to head back to the office and continue to insist they are just as productive at home, at some point corporate leaders will simply offshore those jobs. They did this before with blue collar jobs; they will do it to knowledge workers. Why pay for an accountant/graphic designer/engineer in the US, when you can hire one for a 1/10 of the cost and without pesky employment regulations in Costa Rica or Ghana or India? Even if these employees are (initially) less productive, they will cost so much less that it won't matter. The tax revenue consequences of this will be felt throughout the country.

The safest jobs are going to be jobs that cannot be outsourced: service jobs, professional jobs that require physical interaction (e.g., some doctors), the military, and many government jobs. The latter will make the DC area more offshore-proof than the rest of the country.

In addition, vengeful Republicans will eventually force federal government employees back to the office. They will be delighted at upsetting what they perceive to be lazy government workers. Which will help DC and surrounding areas.

Every time I have been downtown it seems quite busy. Also, I agree that the “vengeful” Republicans are going to force federal workers back into the office. It is only a matter of time.

The House already has a bill introduced by GOP sponsors to end federal telework, as it happens.

Will it pass the Senate? And even if it does, can it reverse or supersede signed bargaining agreements? Not sure it can, on either of those questions.

It’s not likely this will pass the Senate unless it gets included in the debt ceiling package or something like that. The most likely outcome would probably be to lead more agencies to move to the suburbs and that’s likely to happen anyway.

Yep. GSA won't allow my agency to justify new leases or buildings in DC because of the cost savings in PG, Alexandria, and Fairfax.

If more fed agencies move out, wouldn’t that mean a federal city (at least one as big as it is now) is unnecessary? Wouldn’t the exit of more federal agencies bolster DC’s chances of statehood?

The people objecting to DC's statehood by citing the number of government jobs in the city aren't arguing in good faith. They object to DC statehood because the city votes for Democrats by a 80 point margins. Their stated reasoning is merely intellectual window dressing.

Or some of us have studied American history and the Constitution, and realize that the rights available to DC residents predate anyone alive. Don't like them? Don't move there...

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The D.C. Fiscal Policy institute estimates that if D.C. were a state, it would have a net gain of $1 billion (it would be able to tax commuters, among other revenue changes, which would more than offset the additional costs of operating state services the feds currently pay for): https://www.dcfpi.org/all/the-high-cost-of-denying-statehood-to-the-district-of-columbia/

DCGPI also said DC could afford to expand entitlements funded by a national leading income tax increase. So they don’t have a lot of credibility.

We probably could afford to expand entitlements if we increased income taxes. The fact that you don’t want income taxes raised doesn’t mean the financial analysis behind the idea lacks credibility.

DC has the 4th highest state income tax rate in the country, which is remarkable when you consider the other four states are: CA, HI, NY & NJ. There are no internet or finance billionaires in the city. Not even an industry that creates equivalent levels of wealth. And to make matters worse, DC has jurisdictional competition from much wealthier neighbors that doesn’t exist for those other states.

Those are political arguments, not financial arguments, and they probably explain why the city has not raised income taxes to be the highest in the country. As for remarkable tax rates, D.C. has the highest median income among states and territories, so it's not exactly shocking that we also have high tax rates.

DCs tax rates are that high because that is what it takes to fund such a fiscally irresponsible government.