Comment Re:Why is this treated differently (Score 1) 161
That is a good point. It also is germane to telecommuting. The employer is in control of whether you commute or not, but the employee must pay for that commute. This leads to way more people commuting to jobs that have no need of a physical presence. Add on top of this the fact that the way our tax laws are set up, the only way to write off costs of telecommuting is if the telecommute is for the businesses benefit.
Way better would be if laws were written (most likely in the tax code) which gave businesses an incentive to encourage employees who could telecommute to do just that. If even 20% of our work force could telecommute, it would create HUGE savings in our roadway costs. It would reduce our national gas usage significantly. It would improve the quality of lives of our populace. It would reduce congestion in cities. It would even benefit those that still had to go in to work, as it would reduce traffic and thus reduce their commute time and cost. It would also reduce housing price pressures in and around areas that required the physical presence, since 20% of the population would no longer be competing for those homes.
Way better would be if laws were written (most likely in the tax code) which gave businesses an incentive to encourage employees who could telecommute to do just that. If even 20% of our work force could telecommute, it would create HUGE savings in our roadway costs. It would reduce our national gas usage significantly. It would improve the quality of lives of our populace. It would reduce congestion in cities. It would even benefit those that still had to go in to work, as it would reduce traffic and thus reduce their commute time and cost. It would also reduce housing price pressures in and around areas that required the physical presence, since 20% of the population would no longer be competing for those homes.