Direxion Work From Home ETF
Inflationistas triggered by official CPI/PPI numbers not reflecting the inflation they see around them, are going to completely lose their minds when a few months from now, after every "outing/entertainment" venue is back to full capacity, the CPI/PPI still reflects as trending towards stagnancy.
We currently have the lowest labor participation rate since we started documenting it and nobody seems eager to take the abundance of jobs available. Some energy companies in Houston threatened to eliminate WFH during the summer and they experienced so much backlash from employees threatening to quit that they retracted their statement and haven’t mentioned it since. There will always be people so desperate for employment that they’ll take whatever they’re subjected to, but it’s not enough for businesses maintain their day to day operations.
I think he’s saying there is an asymmetry of wages and both the employee and employer can capitalize on it when WFH is an option. Now what actually will happen (and is already starting to happen) is Bay Area tech companies are colluding with each other to pay WFH staff based on their area of residence, eliminating the cost of living bump for the person living in the less expensive area. Pretty bullshit if you ask me.
WFH is more cost efficient for businesses in the long run. No need for expensive property leases and employees are just as efficient assuming they were ever efficient in the first place. Not a bunch of slackers or workers doing two jobs at the same time.
Yes, the fact that it reduces overhead from buildings is the main reason the people with real power want WFH over and done with. All of them are heavily invested in commercial real estate, which would crater in value if everyone worked from home.
Exactly. If anything, WFH makes onshore more viable, either delaying or eliminating certain offshore movements. WFH alone already significantly reduces overhead costs. A WFH model that incentivizes moves to and/or hires from lower COL areas will be next in cost reductions. Making up numbers like the OP, in OPs example you can now only hire 1 to 5 BECAUSE of WFH. But to maintain productivity you still need to hire 1 to 7. Then that will reduce to 1 to 4 as WFH models become more efficient. But you still need to hire 7 to match productivity so now it's 40% more expensive to move that position offshore than it was previously. Again, numbers are made up to demonstrate the concept which is very not made up. Effectively, WFH is making it more expensive than ever to replace people with offshores. You have less expense for that onshore headcount so to replace them offshore starts to make less sense when you weigh the financials and capabilities. Additional note that on average WFH employees are much more efficient and happy which increases their productivity meaning you would need to hire MORE offshore to replace that 1 person than ever before (now its 1-8 baseline). TLDR: Onshore employees will never be as cheap as offshore labor. But the cost savings are getting smaller and smaller as WFH further evolves. Onshore productivity is increasing and total cost of employment are decreasing meanings less benefit (not no benefit) to moving it offshore.
Only some companies don't like WFH. My company loves it. It reduced overhead of building and it took away limitations of hiring talent geographically. The old dinosaurs that run these companies will start dying off in the next 10 years and pave the way for a more flexible workforce.
Half the people I know have WFH jobs where they do 4 hours of "work" a week and are paid 80k. Shit didn't used to be like this. What the fuck is holding this economy up? Is it just farmers and the 4 people at every company that do all the work?
WFH is a totally different time bomb and will not fizzle out. IT departments have been steadily offshoring for the last decade or more. WFH is not going to go well when one guy in Atlanta can be replaced by 7 guys in Bangalore. No dig on Bangalore, just not able to compete w cost of living. If complex IT departments are doing this, Sally in accounting is screwed.
I appreciate your honesty. While the “just move” sounds like the best option, for many people the logistics of it are next to impossible. Take my situation. We bought our house 18 months ago. 30’s. 2 boys, 2 and 5 years old. Since then our house has gone up 30%. But so has EVERY other house. We are currently priced out of areas we were previously looking at with money to spare. We found an affordable daycare here, that would also be significantly higher in a lot of places. And then there’s the factor of commute to work. I do get to WFH 75% of the time but my wife doesn’t and when I do go in, I can’t have a 2 hour travel time each way and then expect to get home in time to be daddy too. So yea man, I would LOVE of the solution for most people was to just up and leave but the truth of the matter is, the hurdles that stand in the way of that are more emotionally, physically, and mentally taxing than the actual act of just staying put
You should probably go talk to some financial advisors or a better one because everything you’re worried about is not a concern with the right strategy in place. Me being incapacitated isn’t the death punch you think it is. I have several layers of protection in place. LTD policies that would pay all of my medical expenses. Yeah, I probably would sell investment properties at that point. But not to pay the medical, just to make them more cash flow friendly and less of a liability. Most likely just put it into a dividend fund that would produce a good cash flow. Scrounging up even just $1M can get $50K+ a year in income with pretty low risk. So if I’m a veggie as you say, my wife sells the house because it has the most value. Cash my retirement account because I’m disabled. Pay off an investment property in cash. Sell off my car because I can’t use it anyway just to reduce the monthly expenses. Set up home care for me through the disability policies. She continues to WFH and we use all the cash collected to supplement her income. We would still be making more than 95% of people. They can’t just “cancel” a life insurance policy. Nor can they change the rate on it. It would still be in place if I was a veggie. As long as we continued to pay the <$100 a month. $7M+ is not unrealistic for someone like me by my 50s. I’m saving a substantial amount of each month, plus most of what I am spending from that is going towards assets. I save more than most families make. Like I said, I’m not at the tippy top, but I’m a lot closer than being at the bottom.
I have a shit rustbucket with over 300,000km on it, and you better believe I'm going to run it into the ground until prices come down. Thankfully I can WFH most days and can take a bus if necessary. Dealers trying to sell 4 year old cars with 100,000km on it for near the same price as a new one 🤣
I'm a Mech/Aero engineer that previously worked as a software engineer. As long as I don't need clearance for the next 5 years for the position (conflict of interest issue), I wouldn't mind applying to a fully WFH job. The price would still have to be right, though.
Check out these companies located in Newfoundland, you might hook a WFH job with them or any the many other tech companies here. Although, wherever you live now, life is better in Newfoundland, so don't rule out a move. [https://triware.ca/careers/](https://triware.ca/careers/) <- looking for both a network admin and system admin [https://verafin.com/careers/](https://verafin.com/careers/) <- this one is looking for software developers right now, but Sysadmin jobs do come up. They're in the financial security business. Some posting/resources here with the NL Tech Association [https://technl.ca/](https://technl.ca/)
But everyone else uses Zoom. If it’s for public consumption they use Zoom. And while Covid is NOT over (riots in China…) WFH and virtual meetings are not over in any case. Again, not commenting on finances or the stock price. Just public mindshare. “Zoom” is burned into the public’s brains, and nobody is asking them to use Microsoft Teams to attend meetings.
I have $59,000 in student loans, If $20,000 gets forgiven that leaves me with $39,000.00. I live in Florida we’re the cost of living has risen a lot. Especially housing. I work a Profit Analyst job at a logistics company for $18/hr. I got a second job as Operations Support for a Finance company for $20.00. At $18/hr I’m essentially living mostly paycheck to paycheck which is not ideal, because I won’t be able to save money to pay off student loans. With these 2 jobs combined, I’m able to save money, and if I can do this for another year, I could dump all of my savings to pay off about $35,000 in debt. It’s 2 WFH jobs. One is 9-5, the other flexible schedule, but I’m so busy I often end up working 14-16 hrs a day. I just hope I don’t get fired or laid off from either job, otherwise I’m kind of screwed with debt accumulating interest. I majored in Economics hoping I could land a job that pays $60k, but that didn’t work out.
Only problem is that if you move further out you experience the opposite of the wage/debt spiral, houses will be cheaper but so will salaries be, and given that home costs are now at a record 9X median salaries when it was 4-5 through most of recent history, and WFH workings drove up prices in many formerly cheap small towns/rural areas, there really aren't many places to escape to unless you want to go to really remote areas that may not have internet set up (which will be an expense) or jobs
I’m pretty sure I’m getting laid of from my WFH 60k a yr insurance butt plug, my stay at home wife of our 4 children who sells 50$ a month in Avon products won’t stop spending money (debt) on consumer bullshit, and poorly made Chinese crap our irresponsible family doesn’t need “we really could use some help, inflation is just crazy”
It's not a problem I personally have. I can WFH if I get sick. It's that I know people who aren't in that position because I don't live in a bubble. You know the person bagging your groceries? Flipping your burger? Serving you a beer? They get to come to work sick or they get fired.
and most people buying homes are two people making two incomes, Moncton also has had prices go crazy because people are retiring in HCOL areas and retiring there or relocation if they can WFH. Most people buy with less than 20% down, you are trying way too hard to play with the numbers
If you're WFH in the US just move to small town USA. I'm in Missouri and prices are a bit high around bigger cities but if you're ok with country living you can still find a lot of nice houses for 300k and under. I bought foreclosure 2017 for 110k. It's worth maybe 220k right now 260k at peak. 1900 sqft 2 car garage 3b3b half acre lot. I'm 10 minutes from downtown
Yeah, Portugal and Spain have very good opportunities for WFH "immigrants" from the right countries. Also they have lots of areas with fairly nice, cheap housing. Might not be in the largest cities, but still, way cheaper than most of the civilized world.
My AR filter ensures my WFH doesn't capture unwarranted distractions, as does the sound filter. In office this also ensures the cubicle farm isn't present in every moment of a call. Light correction and face focus also ensure the video doesn't autolock on randos passing by. That is the essence of business comms. If you weren't some useless schlub sucking cocks behind a dumpster at Wendy's you'd understand that and wouldn't have posted such a poorly regarded statement.
Finding a new high paying white collar job is a job in itself these days. I’m talking four round interviews spread out over four days. Last time I was in the market I made it to a forth and even fifth round and still didn’t get the job. It takes two to three months of dedicated job searching and interviewing to land one of these types of jobs, because with WFH, you are competing against the national talent pool. I can’t imagine doing this and properly looking after kids at the same time.
My money is on down, many companies are still doing WFH and so maintenance isn't as much of a priority on cars and people don't seem to be owning as many cars as previous years.... but with limited stock on many dealerships I could be wrong as it's harder to buy new like pre flu.
I don't see how not wanting to work 60 to 80 hours a week, give up WFH and going "hardcore" has anything to do with politics. If that was me, I would definitely take the severance unless I really didn't have any options or was financially desperate
Dude everything everyone says in here will have some merit. I think that’s what everyone fights / argues about. They all self fulfill each other on the prophecy of inflation. Wages > to costs > further wages > further costs > etc. and almost everything can fit somewhere in there. Fed spending def has a major role, probably more so right now than before, but the Fed hasn’t always existed and we have recorded inflation issues all over the world. Some will blame corporate greed, more money collecting at the top, which can’t be ignored. There’s more recent info that shows as wealth accumulates at the top inflation gets worse. Regular everyday people, strive for more. How can we all get raises without an inherent inflation rise? Personally I feel like money is zero sum and someone has to lose in order for others to gain but that’s another convo. The TLDR version; lots of things. I believe low rates and cheap debt along with WFH and worker shortages (summarized as covid) caused this episode of inflation. There are those who think the Fed needs to stop this. You’ll notice it’s only the very privileged saying this. Soup lines and a depression will not hurt them like it will regular people. Imo the Fed should double down and do a 100 bps to end the year. How dumb is that, companies are using debt to fund operations? That sounds like a failed company. They deserve to go under. Carvana, couldn’t turn a profit during the craziest bull market for autos ever. They deserve to crash and burn. As George Gammon says all the time, there is too much funny money floating around. I just don’t think even he knows, no one does, how fluffed the economy is.
I need life advice from you OGs. I don't know what career path to go with to enjoy that WFH lifestyle while gambling on the toilet. Realistically, what can I go with if I'm majoring in finance with a minor in cs. data analyst jobs? that's the only remote/hybrid career path I can think of.
I feel I’ve been quite lucky (so far). I got a nice interest rate last year on a home. Which it could drop in value but my mortgage payment is quite nice. I got a better paying job this year that is WFH. I’ve converted the extra funds to HSAs and mutual funds and for most part steered away from individual stocks at the moment. And I continue to pay off my credit card weekly. Nothing hangs on my balance.
I would say slippery slope, but it's not that steep. I thought I had that shit down for 15 years. Only occasionally doing it, then only for big events, then maybe one here and there to get the morning started, you get the idea..... Next thing I knew I slid into a hole doing a half ounce a week, mixing it with ketamine to keep the swelling down and drinking in the morning while I WFH. Both substances can be slow to get their hooks in you and it's your ego that makes you think you have it all under control.
What was the scenario that led you to go there? Just trying to get an idea of their customer. Is it your employer sending WFH employees for meetings or is it individuals looking for a place to conduct business without setting up shop in a Starbucks?
Data science for clinical trials. Medical field background. Transitioned into a career I can WFH fulltime. Review medical data from clinical trial patients. Highly recommend you relocate to cities where high pharma are located. Highly recommend applying to intern programs.
"Yes genius I know what a leveraged buy out is - I work for the investment bank who funded Elon’s side….. and everyone in the bank thinks it’s stupid" Ahahahahahahahahahaha. Sure you do and sure you did That's why you pitched this as "mangements good idea"...![img](emote|t5_2th52|4267) The fact that Elon did something stupid isn't mutually exclusive with the fact that twitters previous management did something stupid. As far as WFH please address my previous statement..I didn't say nobody is working hard from home. I said it's patently false that you can't have good software engineers in the office. Just ask Raytheon.
Claiming they don’t do work because they WFH is stupid. WFH is going nowhere and twitter will suffer long term for this change. Yes genius I know what a leveraged buy out is - I work for the investment bank who funded Elon’s side….. and everyone in the bank thinks it’s stupid I was simply playing devils advocate against the Elon fan bois like you pretending he made a good deal. Probably one of the worst takeovers in history
Some people believe that if they don't have discipline, others don't have discipline. Some people are nervous managers who think the only way they can manage a team is if they can walk past a row of seats with people pretending to work so they can check off a box. Both types of people are fossils now. We've all largely worked from home for 3 years. The universe didn't fall apart, just the opposite. The "WFH isn't productive" argument is completely blown apart now. It's coding on the table, and some people are desperate to revive it because they don't know how to operate on their own or operate without explicitly controlling others rather than collaborating with them.
It sounds smart on paper, but the reality is he will lose all his best engineers and there will be a brain drain and the company will struggle to get any shit done. Sure, get rid of the useless middle managers and bs jobs. But pissing off all your engineers when they can easily go get WFH jobs elsewhere is highly regarded.
Twitter is not the only company requiring workers to go back to the office. WFH may end up being just a small portion of the average white collar work schedule. What percentage of Twitter users actually have a blue checkmark? I surmise that those who do can well afford a small charge. Removing restrictions on speech may entice new users, you know the ones that make up the other 50% of the population.
While there are some natural concerns with any public figure being controversial while owning one of the most talked-about public companies in the world, there is a lot of pessimistic sentiments being made here that are just impossible to predict until there is a clearer picture. 1. Tesla investors can be pissed but the operations of the business is all that matters and right now, it's operating beautifully with/without Musk. Long-term, this is all noise. Literally, no one who is investing in Tesla long-term sees an issue with Twitter because the operations of Tesla will soon be impossible to ignore. Firstly, they are already going to be the most profitable U.S. automaker this year. By the end of next year, they will be the most profitable automaker in the world with a projected $18 billion in net income. Is Twitter really going to come into play here? 2. Elon didn't cut 'half' of Twitter's engineering staff. Namely, a large % of them were already planned to be laid off before Elon took over. Hence, why Meta is also planning on laying off thousands of workers. It's an industry layoff. In Twitter's case, these workers were not needed because the projects that they had been working on were scrapped, thus, they aren't going to be working on Twitter's future plans. Most people in the tech community will tell you that they haven't been working much while at home. There's a reason... they really aren't adding much value to the overall company. The reason these tech companies hired en masse was to prevent them from going to their competitors in what they expected was going to be an economy largely dominated by people WFH and thus, using their platform more. When that didn't happen, they all started laying off these workers. 3. Going to your Twitter cash burn, it's true that they lose over $1.3 billion every year. And removing those Twitter employees will cut that amount to $900 million. His initiatives that he plans on pushing out is largely designed to create an alternative source of revenue which in all likelihood, is TBD. He literally took over two weeks ago. I don't see how you can accurately presume that it won't work. 4. Those people making names to imposter people is going to get fixed real quick. Either way, they are paying $8 just to get banned shortly after. They are trying new methods and there are ways to correct them. Was Twitter a mistake for Mr. Musk? Yes, probably so. But the verdict on whether he can turn Twitter around is going to require more than two weeks to decide. IMO, there are lots of ideas that are going to be implemented that will positively turn Twitter around. Either way, Tesla on its own is more than capable of operating with or without Musk. I highly doubt Musk's presence is even needed with Tesla right now. There are people who are put in charge who are familiar with how Tesla operates by now.
We call them Flex Desks, you can reserve one when you come in but are mostly remote. People want the flexibility to WFH but don't want companies to dump real estate and densify. Can't have it both ways or more layoffs happen. Two big ways to save money, payroll or real estate. My company chose real estate and people generally understand that is why they dont have assigned space. I don't need an assigned seat in this new environment but some people feel like they HAVE to have a seat. This was happening in places before Zuck came up with it, in fact we have been planning this for years. This story is actually one of the smarter ideas Zuck has made. Hopefully it wont help Meta, fuck them and I hope they go down in flames.
7 on WHF days, probably 5 to 6 on office days. But in the recent months I have been going to the office maybe one or two days a week and only for a few hours before I think of a good reason to leave. My desk is in a small room with no windows that I think used to be a storage room and there is another engineer lady in there in the corner who has way more seniority than me and she's nice to me but I think it annoys that I'm in there. I hate sitting in there and its dark so I've just been WFH, what will they do fire me? unlikely.
Doesn’t even have to be a WFH job. Freshii is doing this with cashiers. https://www.thestar.com/amp/business/2022/04/26/meet-the-freshii-virtual-cashier-who-works-from-nicaragua-for-375-an-hour.html Outsourced Call centres but for everything
Well here's a 9 month study of over 10,000 workers conducted by a Stanford researcher in 2014 and backed by historical data from the BLS ATUS. The author of this study wrote this article to explain his current work and has been advisingany corporations to continue WFH policies based on his economic expertise in the area: https://siepr.stanford.edu/publications/policy-brief/how-working-home-works-out And you have: nothing.
I've been WFH since March 2020 and I'm 1000% more productive at home. Studies back me up. Maybe you didn't get along with your coworkers but after all the office chats and team buildings and distractions, burnout from traffic, stress from office politics....the office is a waste of time you'll never get back in your life. I'll never do it again. I'm all for after hours or weekend meet ups with virtual coworkers, maybe go In for a big meeting once a quarter.
People will do anything to prevent the gravy train from stopping, you’ll get downvoted for even suggesting this. But yeah, every piece of software, movie, or video game that has come out since WFH started has bombed or delayed which doesn’t tell me this is a great system. Redditors will keep insisting they’re more productive from home and don’t need to ever see their team face to face but that’s not representative of reality.
Many companies reported record profits during the pandemic and coming out of it. If anything, productivity may have increased with more folks working from home? I think there are many jobs where WFH is just as, if not more, efficient as working in an office. There’s definitely benefits to having teams in the same place (building camaraderie, impromptu meetings, etc) but depends on the type of work and team makeup. Hybrid model works best for my particular line of work.
is it really hard to believe that people WFH are just less productive? when the pandemic first hit i saw a couple articles saying that people would do literally anything besides actually working when WFH, and it makes sense because all my coworkers actively admit that WFH is nice because they can fold laundry in meetings and do chores intermittently during the work day.
CEOs want butts in chairs for two reasons: 1)They need to do layoffs but hope that forcing people back to the office will result in resignations rather than layoffs which a) don't require severance packages and b) don't look bad to investors 2) A significant amount of their capital/ability to secure funding comes from their ownership of corporate real estate. In a world where the majority of people WFH, this corporate real estate becomes worth less and assumes more liability than asset.