3 ms·

I think that ship really has sailed, as there is no longer the expertise and it would be a considerable downgrade in supply to switch back to smaller farms (tho

I think that ship really has sailed, as there is no longer the expertise and it would be a considerable downgrade in supply to switch back to smaller farms (though I support lessening the burden). The idea of call centers and "remote" workplaces come to mind frequently - in theory anywhere with an internet connection should be able to find people cheap to do any digital work that needs doing. We need to find a way to not concentrate all the wealth in cities.

Zigurd 9y ago
Re "We need to find a way to not concentrate all the wealth in cities." You have the crux of the matter right, but the goal might be unattainable in practice. Urbanization is currently a strong force in all economies. In the developing world, it mostly isn't a bad thing because it improves conditions for migrants from rural areas. It's an open question whether it's a bad thing in developed economies, especially if it reduces the kind of residual racism and intolerance that brews in the countryside. It's not just economic poverty that is reduced by urbanization. In other words, the calls for understanding "flyover country" and healing the rural economy can prove to be futile. If they are futile or unrealistic, what then?
- taurath 9y ago
  It certainly could be, but the jury is still out - plenty of things could come in and change the calculus. I’m not of the opinion that it’s a foregone conclusion, but I also don’t have a whole lot of ideas as to how to make that part of the country support the people living in it.
lev99 9y ago
Call centers and remote offices under perform their Head Quarters counterpart. The best building to work (for your career) is almost always the one where the C-suite has their offices.
- taurath 9y ago
  Of course they do, but do they underperform to the point that the cost difference means nothing? I’d argue there’s plenty of room for lower efficiency but at vastly lower cost. If you have an office of 1000 employees making $60k vs $100k you’re saving at least 25% (after benefits/healthcare), let alone real estate. You could operate offices at 75% productivity and still come ahead, no? I ask out of actual curiosity.

Zigurd 9y ago

Re "We need to find a way to not concentrate all the wealth in cities." You have the crux of the matter right, but the goal might be unattainable in practice. Urbanization is currently a strong force in all economies. In the developing world, it mostly isn't a bad thing because it improves conditions for migrants from rural areas. It's an open question whether it's a bad thing in developed economies, especially if it reduces the kind of residual racism and intolerance that brews in the countryside. It's not just economic poverty that is reduced by urbanization. In other words, the calls for understanding "flyover country" and healing the rural economy can prove to be futile. If they are futile or unrealistic, what then?

taurath 9y ago
It certainly could be, but the jury is still out - plenty of things could come in and change the calculus. I’m not of the opinion that it’s a foregone conclusion, but I also don’t have a whole lot of ideas as to how to make that part of the country support the people living in it.

lev99 9y ago

Call centers and remote offices under perform their Head Quarters counterpart. The best building to work (for your career) is almost always the one where the C-suite has their offices.

taurath 9y ago
Of course they do, but do they underperform to the point that the cost difference means nothing? I’d argue there’s plenty of room for lower efficiency but at vastly lower cost. If you have an office of 1000 employees making $60k vs $100k you’re saving at least 25% (after benefits/healthcare), let alone real estate. You could operate offices at 75% productivity and still come ahead, no? I ask out of actual curiosity.