Coronavirus pandemic

[1995hoo]

Ft Belvoir Wegmans?

Yes

[oscar]

^^^ Is that an N95 mask? I've heard they uncomfortably constrict air flow, but seem to be popular with painters in auto body shops and other non-medical craftsmen.

I have a few better-than-nothing consumer-grade surgical masks, several still in their plastic wrapping. I got a small box of those in December, pre-coronavirus, while I was fighting off a nasty cold. They provide some protection against my spreading to other people, but not as much as an N95 against my catching a virus or other bug from someone else.

BTW, does that Wegman's have TP in stock? My own stock is still OK (lucked into a six-pack of double rolls at the Walmart in Brevard NC, on my way back from Georgia), but was expecting to revisit that Wegman's if I started getting desperate.

[1995hoo]

It is indeed an N95 mask, according to the label. I didn't feel like it constricted the air flow so much as it was pinching my ears and was annoying with eyeglasses at the same time (but I need those for distance!). I had to take off my glasses before putting on or taking off the mask. I think we bought it some years back when we were resurfacing a table. Didn't know anything about N95 versus any other type at the time.

The paper product aisle was pretty cleaned out when I was there, but I should note it was mid-afternoon when I went, so that likely made a difference. Meat and produce were better-stocked than the past few weeks and they had big signs about limit two packages of any one type of meat per customer.

I have heard from other people that the best-stocked local stores are Lidl and the Asian markets. I haven't yet been to Lidl, though it's not at all far from us (Commerce Street in Springfield between Backlick Road and Brandon Avenue). Just haven't had reason to check it out yet.

[nexus73]

Right now I am curious as to how the Hollywood Freeway and San Diego Freeway are doing?  Is it still very busy or is it like the earliest of morning hours on a holiday? 

Rick

I've been looking at traffic cameras online.

There has been a lot of pictures of I-405 as of late with little to no traffic during rush hour on California Highway groups on Facebook. 

Wow!  When the 405 is quiet during rush hour, you know This Is A Serious Situation!  Back in 1986, the top part of a ship coming to dock in Coos Bay hit the McCullough Bridge.  There went 101's traffic in North Bend.  Since I lived in the north end of town at that time, I had a front row seat to a deserted highway.  That was spooky enough. 

We also had a sense of humor.  Stickers came out saying "The Ship Hit The Span!".

Rick

I kind of question when a lot of those photos are being taken.  Even before the whole virus thing started I was able to get empty freeway photos out of the Bay Area and Los Angeles pretty easily at certain hours.  I posted a photo of I-280 in San Francisco which I took on a normal Sunday which was pretty much identical to a Virus-Time photo that was popular for about a week.  Freeways around Fresno have less volume but are far from empty. 

Agreed.  I've read various things online such as how much cleaner the air is now, yet a picture that has gotten a lot of attention shows plenty of smog.  There's nothing to really indicate the time or date of the pictures, and as much as people should have learned long ago that you shouldn't believe everything you see on the internet, people are quick to believe everything they see on the internet.

I can’t speak for Los Angeles since I don’t live there but the difference in air quality 200 miles north is about the same or nominally different for a rainy year.  The rain picking up into Spring probably is a bigger factor in clearing up the air quality.  Usually by this time of year the rain is gone and the snow pack is already melting.  There is more rain the forecast for this next week which I’m sure will keep the air particulate free for awhile longer.

Regarding Los Angeles, pollution control measures in cars in general have reduced the smog level significantly in the last couple decades.  I can’t recall a time in recent memory on a sunny day I worked around L.A. where I couldn’t see the San Gabriels. 

When I came through the Southland on my way back to Oregon in February 1999, the clarity of the air down there surprised me.  Back in the Seventies, one could drive from Santa Monica to Palm Springs and never escape the smog.

Rick

[Max Rockatansky]

Right now I am curious as to how the Hollywood Freeway and San Diego Freeway are doing?  Is it still very busy or is it like the earliest of morning hours on a holiday? 

Rick

I've been looking at traffic cameras online.

There has been a lot of pictures of I-405 as of late with little to no traffic during rush hour on California Highway groups on Facebook. 

Wow!  When the 405 is quiet during rush hour, you know This Is A Serious Situation!  Back in 1986, the top part of a ship coming to dock in Coos Bay hit the McCullough Bridge.  There went 101's traffic in North Bend.  Since I lived in the north end of town at that time, I had a front row seat to a deserted highway.  That was spooky enough. 

We also had a sense of humor.  Stickers came out saying "The Ship Hit The Span!".

Rick

I kind of question when a lot of those photos are being taken.  Even before the whole virus thing started I was able to get empty freeway photos out of the Bay Area and Los Angeles pretty easily at certain hours.  I posted a photo of I-280 in San Francisco which I took on a normal Sunday which was pretty much identical to a Virus-Time photo that was popular for about a week.  Freeways around Fresno have less volume but are far from empty. 

Agreed.  I've read various things online such as how much cleaner the air is now, yet a picture that has gotten a lot of attention shows plenty of smog.  There's nothing to really indicate the time or date of the pictures, and as much as people should have learned long ago that you shouldn't believe everything you see on the internet, people are quick to believe everything they see on the internet.

I can't speak for Los Angeles since I don't live there but the difference in air quality 200 miles north is about the same or nominally different for a rainy year.  The rain picking up into Spring probably is a bigger factor in clearing up the air quality.  Usually by this time of year the rain is gone and the snow pack is already melting.  There is more rain the forecast for this next week which I'm sure will keep the air particulate free for awhile longer.

Regarding Los Angeles, pollution control measures in cars in general have reduced the smog level significantly in the last couple decades.  I can't recall a time in recent memory on a sunny day I worked around L.A. where I couldn't see the San Gabriels. 

When I came through the Southland on my way back to Oregon in February 1999, the clarity of the air down there surprised me.  Back in the Seventies, one could drive from Santa Monica to Palm Springs and never escape the smog.

Rick

It definitely isn't the cleanest city in the country by a large margin but it is far removed from the choking smog that was common in pictures in the 1950s and 1960s.  The problem is with a lot of California's big cities is that all the pollution gets trapped by the mountains and has nowhere to go.  In the Central Valley that pollution isn't much smog but rather dust from all the farms kicking stuff up.  You can almost see the later of dust kick up at 7 AM and immediately start to obscure the Sierras.  Oddly I never found that effect happen much in Phoenix, even after a dust storm. 

[hbelkins]

I think that a first step for many office jobs should be the option of working from home in place of sick leave.  I have had many days over the years in which I have gone to work or school sick with mild symptoms because that was what I felt expected to do or that I would get behind quickly.  If am mildly sick, and I am fine enough to wake up and get on my computer, then I do not see why I could not productively work from home instead of potentially sickening others in the office if possible.

I'm hopeful that this will be the case in my agency, as well.

To add to this...

Before the virus, there was no way I, or anyone within the organization, could have worked from home.  We needed to be in the office, communicating with people, getting to our files, etc.  We had laptops to get by for a day if the state was closed due to snow or other emergency, and I think there was some sort of plan to work in an offsite building if our building wasn't available.

Then the virus hit.  My section already had the tools available to work from home (our laptops).  We can remotely access our servers.  I have an extra monitor at home, and another computer, and could almost fully do my job without interruption. The only thing I didn't have was files in a filing cabinet, but I can get around that if needed.

When we'll finally be allowed to return to work, I hope that they allow us to work from home 1 or 2 days a week. Clearly we have shown it can be done...after years of being told it can't.

There have been many times that I've taken a sick day when I could have worked, but didn't feel like getting ready and driving 45 minutes to the office. We've been working from home for a couple of weeks, but were told yesterday that we're not to come to the office unless absolutely necessary, and then get done what we need to get done and go finish out the day at home. I had been going in two days a week and working at home three days.

I don't have VPN access to my desktop or the server, as I'm running an older version of the Mac OS on my laptop so as not to break my full version of Adobe CS2. I have a more modern Mac OS loaded on an external drive, but I know it will take forever to get my stuff restored from a Time Machine backup on to it, so I haven't tried.  As it is, I can't even load the Remote Desktop software from the Mac app store. I'm also hampered by not having two monitors and a slower network connection, so what I do is slower than normal. Last week, I had to get out a press release with graphics and it took me about 45 minutes to turn it around, as opposed to 20 minutes if I was at the office.

I'm in hopes that when this is all over and they do the post-mortem on our response, they will allow working at home anytime someone feels ill but not ill enough to go to the doctor, or during times of inclement weather. (Presently, the weather policy is that you have three months to make up the time if you miss due to weather.)

I have to admit, it's handy to be able to wake up at 7:50 to be ready for work by 8, and work in T-shirt and shorts or sweats. I'm saving wear and tear on my vehicle, not having to drive 60 miles a day (and working from home is handy, since I've had car trouble each of the last two Fridays and would have had to miss this past Monday and this coming Monday). But when we do go back to work, gas will probably shoot up to $3 a gallon so the gas savings I'm enjoying will get eaten up. But this means special trips out to go to the store, as I was used to making Walmart runs at lunch and stopping at other stores on my way home.

[SSOWorld]

Sweats and a t-shirts are nice.  However, One would be expected to be somewhat professional in my line of work.  Both my employer and the client stressed this.  Plus its one less thing to do before getting outside of the house to break the cabin fever.

Side note: looks like a good use for bandannas has been found.  COVID masks. (No I'm not going to cut it up)

[Brian556]

I wonder if this will make people re-think living in New York City, if it will become less desirable, and if some people will move out

[jeffandnicole]

I wonder if this will make people re-think living in New York City, if it will become less desirable, and if some people will move out

A terrorist attack didn't. I don't see this causing a mass exodus either.

[Max Rockatansky]

I wonder if this will make people re-think living in New York City, if it will become less desirable, and if some people will move out

A terrorist attack didn't. I don't see this causing a mass exodus either.

The problem with leaving New York City is that the mode of life is so substantially different than almost the rest of the country that it would be a hard adaptation.  If I recall correctly doesn't NYC have the lowest rate of car ownership in the country?

[Duke87]

I wonder if this will make people re-think living in New York City, if it will become less desirable, and if some people will move out

A terrorist attack didn't. I don't see this causing a mass exodus either.

The problem with leaving New York City is that the mode of life is so substantially different than almost the rest of the country that it would be a hard adaptation.  If I recall correctly doesn't NYC have the lowest rate of car ownership in the country?

New York City is the only place in America where if you own a car, you are in the minority.

And yes I don't see this causing any mass long-term exodus. Where a person lives is generally something about their life that they tend to have relatively low flexibility on. People don't leave places in droves unless there is significant reason why staying isn't a viable option.

I also don't see this causing all that huge of a rethink of planning policies around densification, transit-oriented-development, etc. since the underlying motives for these things will remain and will not be easily ignored. Any changes to better enable people to avoid spreading diseases to each other in urban environments will only be tweaks around the edges of how things are done.

Some areas where I do think we should be on the lookout for changes in how things are done to persist include:
- people with office jobs being able and permitted to work remotely may remain more prevalent than it was previously, because a lot of companies that previously didn't have the infrastructure to enable it in place now will, and a lot of people who were previously skeptical of it will have seen it can work. Along the same lines, business travel may see some amount of permanent reduction as companies realize that some trips people had to cancel because of this weren't really necessary expenses to begin with.
- there was already a budding trend in many places in the world to try to roll back globalization and take on a more isolationist foreign policy stance. This potentially fuels that fire. Medical supplies in particular will come to be seen in the US as vital for national security, and there may be efforts to shift supply chains such that they are produced domestically with domestically-sourced materials. Also, a lot of countries may find themselves suddenly a little bit more reluctant to do business with China. I seriously doubt, however, that this will lead to the downfall of the PRC government anytime soon, as much as many people would love to see that happen.
- One thing that will help prevent repeats is that the next time there are reports of some virus outbreak occurring somewhere, the world will collectively quickly overreact to it. Up until a month ago, most people didn't really take the threat of a major nasty virus outbreak in the developed world seriously. Now they will.
- Do expect that, as with 9/11, there will be some forms of privacy and/or individual freedom which will be lost permanently in the name of attempting to guard against a repeat event. And as with 9/11, some of these losses will be pure security theater.

[kalvado]

I wonder if this will make people re-think living in New York City, if it will become less desirable, and if some people will move out

A terrorist attack didn't. I don't see this causing a mass exodus either.

The problem with leaving New York City is that the mode of life is so substantially different than almost the rest of the country that it would be a hard adaptation.  If I recall correctly doesn't NYC have the lowest rate of car ownership in the country?

New York City is the only place in America where if you own a car, you are in the minority.

And yes I don't see this causing any mass long-term exodus. Where a person lives is generally something about their life that they tend to have relatively low flexibility on. People don't leave places in droves unless there is significant reason why staying isn't a viable option.

I also don't see this causing all that huge of a rethink of planning policies around densification, transit-oriented-development, etc. since the underlying motives for these things will remain and will not be easily ignored. Any changes to better enable people to avoid spreading diseases to each other in urban environments will only be tweaks around the edges of how things are done.

Some areas where I do think we should be on the lookout for changes in how things are done to persist include:
- people with office jobs being able and permitted to work remotely may remain more prevalent than it was previously, because a lot of companies that previously didn't have the infrastructure to enable it in place now will, and a lot of people who were previously skeptical of it will have seen it can work. Along the same lines, business travel may see some amount of permanent reduction as companies realize that some trips people had to cancel because of this weren't really necessary expenses to begin with.
- there was already a budding trend in many places in the world to try to roll back globalization and take on a more isolationist foreign policy stance. This potentially fuels that fire. Medical supplies in particular will come to be seen in the US as vital for national security, and there may be efforts to shift supply chains such that they are produced domestically with domestically-sourced materials. Also, a lot of countries may find themselves suddenly a little bit more reluctant to do business with China. I seriously doubt, however, that this will lead to the downfall of the PRC government anytime soon, as much as many people would love to see that happen.
- One thing that will help prevent repeats is that the next time there are reports of some virus outbreak occurring somewhere, the world will collectively quickly overreact to it. Up until a month ago, most people didn't really take the threat of a major nasty virus outbreak in the developed world seriously. Now they will.
- Do expect that, as with 9/11, there will be some forms of privacy and/or individual freedom which will be lost permanently in the name of attempting to guard against a repeat event. And as with 9/11, some of these losses will be pure security theater.

A seconldary flare up due to packed subway and a second - and I wouldn't be surprised with the third -wave of lockdown can be a good argument for business tol move out of city

[ftballfan]

I wonder if this will make people re-think living in New York City, if it will become less desirable, and if some people will move out

A terrorist attack didn't. I don't see this causing a mass exodus either.

The problem with leaving New York City is that the mode of life is so substantially different than almost the rest of the country that it would be a hard adaptation.  If I recall correctly doesn't NYC have the lowest rate of car ownership in the country?

New York City is the only place in America where if you own a car, you are in the minority.

And yes I don't see this causing any mass long-term exodus. Where a person lives is generally something about their life that they tend to have relatively low flexibility on. People don't leave places in droves unless there is significant reason why staying isn't a viable option.

I also don't see this causing all that huge of a rethink of planning policies around densification, transit-oriented-development, etc. since the underlying motives for these things will remain and will not be easily ignored. Any changes to better enable people to avoid spreading diseases to each other in urban environments will only be tweaks around the edges of how things are done.

Some areas where I do think we should be on the lookout for changes in how things are done to persist include:
- people with office jobs being able and permitted to work remotely may remain more prevalent than it was previously, because a lot of companies that previously didn't have the infrastructure to enable it in place now will, and a lot of people who were previously skeptical of it will have seen it can work. Along the same lines, business travel may see some amount of permanent reduction as companies realize that some trips people had to cancel because of this weren't really necessary expenses to begin with.
- there was already a budding trend in many places in the world to try to roll back globalization and take on a more isolationist foreign policy stance. This potentially fuels that fire. Medical supplies in particular will come to be seen in the US as vital for national security, and there may be efforts to shift supply chains such that they are produced domestically with domestically-sourced materials. Also, a lot of countries may find themselves suddenly a little bit more reluctant to do business with China. I seriously doubt, however, that this will lead to the downfall of the PRC government anytime soon, as much as many people would love to see that happen.
- One thing that will help prevent repeats is that the next time there are reports of some virus outbreak occurring somewhere, the world will collectively quickly overreact to it. Up until a month ago, most people didn't really take the threat of a major nasty virus outbreak in the developed world seriously. Now they will.
- Do expect that, as with 9/11, there will be some forms of privacy and/or individual freedom which will be lost permanently in the name of attempting to guard against a repeat event. And as with 9/11, some of these losses will be pure security theater.

I could see temperature checks start to be implemented at major airports. Many large Asian airports started temperature checks in the aftermath of SARS. Also, contact tracing will start to be implemented more than it already is.

Tourism should start to recover sometime this summer, especially for destinations where people already mostly drive to.

[Max Rockatansky]

Airports in Mexico were doing checks back in February before things got all nutty here in the Americas.  The airport was the only place I heard anything about the Coronavirus during the trip aside from some beer jokes.  I would be curious to hear what flying domestically is like at the moment, I'd have to imagine that the FAA has mandated some sort of screening procedure. 

[hotdogPi]

Observations for the United States:

* Louisiana's spread seems to be primarily due to Tony Spell, the pastor who refused to close his church.
* Nebraska is the only state where the doubling time is decreasing, although it might also be happening with South Dakota and Iowa.
* Minnesota is doing really well.
* Low cases relative to population: Quad Cities, northwest AR, Amarillo (although increasing very quickly), Rapid City, El Paso (no data for Ciudad Juárez), Rio Grande valley, Twin Cities

[Max Rockatansky]

Watched a video about the Great Plague of London which occurred in 1665-1666.  Kind of a mini localized Black Death with some "interesting"  methods of containment.  Essentially if someone got sick your house you were written off as already dead:

[Max Rockatansky]

Observations for the United States:

* Louisiana's spread seems to be primarily due to Tony Spell, the pastor who refused to close his church.
* Nebraska is the only state where the doubling time is decreasing, although it might also be happening with South Dakota and Iowa.
* Minnesota is doing really well.
* Low cases relative to population: Quad Cities, northwest AR, Amarillo (although increasing very quickly), Rapid City, El Paso (no data for Ciudad Juárez), Rio Grande valley, Twin Cities

Lots of rural areas in the Central States.  Aside from the big cities in the Desert States there are similarly low numbers there as well.  I think Fresno County just passed 200 cases which I'm sure to some is a surprisingly low number considering Fresno has just over 500,000 residents.

[CoreySamson]

Observations for the United States:

* Louisiana's spread seems to be primarily due to Tony Spell, the pastor who refused to close his church.
* Nebraska is the only state where the doubling time is decreasing, although it might also be happening with South Dakota and Iowa.
* Minnesota is doing really well.
* Low cases relative to population: Quad Cities, northwest AR, Amarillo (although increasing very quickly), Rapid City, El Paso (no data for Ciudad Juárez), Rio Grande valley, Twin Cities

I'd say Texas as a whole is doing well in the Covid-19 per capita right now, especially considering that all other states with high populations have over 10,000 cases, while Texas is sitting at 6500 or so. For instance, Houston has about 1500 cases, but Chicago has 7500 or so.

Of course, that may change, but still, I'm not going to be afraid of it, however, everyone needs to respect what it can do and how it can spread.

[Max Rockatansky]

Observations for the United States:

* Louisiana's spread seems to be primarily due to Tony Spell, the pastor who refused to close his church.
* Nebraska is the only state where the doubling time is decreasing, although it might also be happening with South Dakota and Iowa.
* Minnesota is doing really well.
* Low cases relative to population: Quad Cities, northwest AR, Amarillo (although increasing very quickly), Rapid City, El Paso (no data for Ciudad Juárez), Rio Grande valley, Twin Cities

I'd say Texas as a whole is doing well in the Covid-19 per capita right now, especially considering that all other states with high populations have over 10,000 cases, while Texas is sitting at 6500 or so. For instance, Houston has about 1500 cases, but Chicago has 7500 or so.

Of course, that may change, but still, I'm not going to be afraid of it, however, everyone needs to respect what it can do and how it can spread.

There really isn't much of a point of being afraid IMO...concerned yes.  As long as someone is taking rational measures to minimize their exposure than there really isn't much else anyone can do to mitigate if they'll get sick or not.  There is a pretty good chance by now a significant chunk of the population has been exposed and exhibited mild to no symptoms.  Even if you caught the virus you wouldn't likely know unless you became ill enough you got sick enough to need some actual medical intervention just to get tested.  Even then the help you get in the best cases is essentially is a stay in an ICU ward for a couple weeks or fully on actual quarantine at home. 

[kalvado]

Airports in Mexico were doing checks back in February before things got all nutty here in the Americas.  The airport was the only place I heard anything about the Coronavirus during the trip aside from some beer jokes.  I would be curious to hear what flying domestically is like at the moment, I'd have to imagine that the FAA has mandated some sort of screening procedure.

Just asked a friend who travels for a living, even now.
No fever checks for domestic travel, only when arriving from a foreign destination.

[Max Rockatansky]

Airports in Mexico were doing checks back in February before things got all nutty here in the Americas.  The airport was the only place I heard anything about the Coronavirus during the trip aside from some beer jokes.  I would be curious to hear what flying domestically is like at the moment, I'd have to imagine that the FAA has mandated some sort of screening procedure.

Just asked a friend who travels for a living, even now.
No fever checks for domestic travel, only when arriving from a foreign destination.

Geeze, I would have thought they would at least ask the question.  I get asked everyday at work and have been for weeks. 

[US71]

Airports in Mexico were doing checks back in February before things got all nutty here in the Americas.  The airport was the only place I heard anything about the Coronavirus during the trip aside from some beer jokes.  I would be curious to hear what flying domestically is like at the moment, I'd have to imagine that the FAA has mandated some sort of screening procedure.

Just asked a friend who travels for a living, even now.
No fever checks for domestic travel, only when arriving from a foreign destination.

Is Louisiana a foreign destination?
https://www.houstonchronicle.com/news/houston-texas/houston/article/Travel-from-Louisiana-further-tightened-by-new-15180553.php

[kalvado]

Airports in Mexico were doing checks back in February before things got all nutty here in the Americas.  The airport was the only place I heard anything about the Coronavirus during the trip aside from some beer jokes.  I would be curious to hear what flying domestically is like at the moment, I'd have to imagine that the FAA has mandated some sort of screening procedure.

Just asked a friend who travels for a living, even now.
No fever checks for domestic travel, only when arriving from a foreign destination.

Is Louisiana a foreign destination?
https://www.houstonchronicle.com/news/houston-texas/houston/article/Travel-from-Louisiana-further-tightened-by-new-15180553.php

That was about airport checks, and while I don't know his travel details - probably NE airports.
This is more about lack of federal policy, even in situation where federal authority is already exists and adding a step is unlikely to be disputed

[RobbieL2415]

Friendly reminder: don't ever talk to cops.

[vdeane]

I wonder if this will make people re-think living in New York City, if it will become less desirable, and if some people will move out

A terrorist attack didn't. I don't see this causing a mass exodus either.

The problem with leaving New York City is that the mode of life is so substantially different than almost the rest of the country that it would be a hard adaptation.  If I recall correctly doesn't NYC have the lowest rate of car ownership in the country?

New York City is the only place in America where if you own a car, you are in the minority.

And yes I don't see this causing any mass long-term exodus. Where a person lives is generally something about their life that they tend to have relatively low flexibility on. People don't leave places in droves unless there is significant reason why staying isn't a viable option.

I also don't see this causing all that huge of a rethink of planning policies around densification, transit-oriented-development, etc. since the underlying motives for these things will remain and will not be easily ignored. Any changes to better enable people to avoid spreading diseases to each other in urban environments will only be tweaks around the edges of how things are done.

Some areas where I do think we should be on the lookout for changes in how things are done to persist include:
- people with office jobs being able and permitted to work remotely may remain more prevalent than it was previously, because a lot of companies that previously didn't have the infrastructure to enable it in place now will, and a lot of people who were previously skeptical of it will have seen it can work. Along the same lines, business travel may see some amount of permanent reduction as companies realize that some trips people had to cancel because of this weren't really necessary expenses to begin with.
- there was already a budding trend in many places in the world to try to roll back globalization and take on a more isolationist foreign policy stance. This potentially fuels that fire. Medical supplies in particular will come to be seen in the US as vital for national security, and there may be efforts to shift supply chains such that they are produced domestically with domestically-sourced materials. Also, a lot of countries may find themselves suddenly a little bit more reluctant to do business with China. I seriously doubt, however, that this will lead to the downfall of the PRC government anytime soon, as much as many people would love to see that happen.
- One thing that will help prevent repeats is that the next time there are reports of some virus outbreak occurring somewhere, the world will collectively quickly overreact to it. Up until a month ago, most people didn't really take the threat of a major nasty virus outbreak in the developed world seriously. Now they will.
- Do expect that, as with 9/11, there will be some forms of privacy and/or individual freedom which will be lost permanently in the name of attempting to guard against a repeat event. And as with 9/11, some of these losses will be pure security theater.

Telecommuting will likely be a big cause a change in population distribution.  Right now, everyone is moving to large cities, whether they can afford to or not, because that's where the jobs are, and the jobs are there because companies like concentrating a ton of workers from their industry in one place to maximize the pool of people to hire from.  If more people start working from home, the need to do that is reduced.  As such, I would think that people who moved to the area because they like being in a large metro area would stay, but I could see the people who would prefer somewhere smaller/more affordable to move out if given the option to work from home.

This would likely have a side effect of making housing more affordable everywhere it currently isn't, since cities would no longer be able to rely on their employer base to attract residents, and property owners couldn't just raise rents as high as they want since people could just leave without having to look for a new job in a place with fewer employers.