4 ms·
I call bullshit! More than 50% of companies have positions that could telecommute and 24%+ of people telecommute fully or partly now.[2] People do want to liv
by mhuffman 8y ago
I call bullshit!
More than 50% of companies have positions that could telecommute and 24%+ of people telecommute fully or partly now.[2]
People do want to live in large cities because of all the cool shit there to do, and that convenience costs money.
You can afford a two-bedroom house in the south-eastern part of the US on $15/hour, which wouldn't even cover the costs of being homeless in SF or NYC.
I understand people want convenience and people want to be close to friends and family, but many of them (not all) could easily solve this problem by simply moving. People seem to think they are "owed" affordable housing regardless of where that housing is -- which is absurd!
[1] https://www.forbes.com/sites/karstenstrauss/2017/06/22/the-growing-army-of-americans-who-work-from-home/#391b29cd4ff7 https://www.forbes.com/sites/karstenstrauss/2017/06/22/the-g...
[2] https://www.bls.gov/opub/ted/2016/24-percent-of-employed-people-did-some-or-all-of-their-work-at-home-in-2015.htm https://www.bls.gov/opub/ted/2016/24-percent-of-employed-peo...
- DoreenMichele 8y agoSo, in order for that 24 percent to be free to move where they please, that needs to be a figure where they can telecommute full time or where going to the office occasionally from farther away costs less than the amount saved by moving farther away. On top of that, all other household members would need to be equally portable, such as a working spouse or children attending school. I got myself off the street in part by developing portable earned income and moving someplace cheap. It is something I am willing to recommend as a method. But my entire household was free to move. That isn't always the case.
- throwaway2048 8y agohaving positions that could telecommute does precious little if the company isnt interested in enabling it. Not sure how this is the worker's fault.