7 ms·

> If you live in a fancy metro, your rent will be above average compared to the nation. The problem with this view is that places that a few decades ago would

> If you live in a fancy metro, your rent will be above average compared to the nation. The problem with this view is that places that a few decades ago would have counted as 'fancy metros' are now more accurately described as 'the only places where there are any jobs (the wages of which are still often insufficient to pay for housing)'. Which leads to another actionable suggestion: we should stop tolerating failure to hire remote workers. (Yes, I know the excuses. We should also stop tolerating those excuses.)

deleted 8y ago
[deleted]
crusso 8y ago
we should stop tolerating failure to hire remote workers What are you suggesting?
- rwallace 8y ago
  I'm suggesting that we treat discrimination against remote workers the way we treated some other forms of harmful discrimination in hiring: stop doing it, stop accepting or repeating excuses for doing it, stop tolerating companies doing it, and ultimately make it illegal.
  - CompelTechnic 8y ago
    Remote workers are not a protected class, and there is no reason to make them a pretected class, considering the reality that lots of jobs require a physical presence. Calling it discrimination implies that there is a permanent population of people who are capable of working, but can only possibly work if they do not have to commute, and that they are being oppressed because of this. It is not discrimination so much as it's a case of society having a different set of preferences than you.
    - ben_w 8y ago
      GP is giving an economic rather than a social justice reason for making it a protected class. I don’t think I agree with him, but that doesn’t make it “not a reason”. Reason I disagree with him is that if workplaces rearrange themselves to not need physical presence, all the jobs suddenly get done by whichever genuinely third world nation can put high bandwidth internet connection into literal shantytown slums the fastest. If this was a gradual and planned-for change, starting with boosting the salary expectations of the poorest in the world up to our level, that’s one thing. Doing it to solve housing cost differences between rural and urban areas in developed nations will just blow up in everyone’s faces with unhandled side-effects.
  - tomrod 8y ago
    Sounds like a nice ideal. I'm an economist. The first thing that comes to mind is the technology infrastructure costs required to maintain a potentially all remote workforce. A central location is better for a number of different workstreams. The second thing that comes to mind is unintended consequences. Are all jobs remote? Bakers? Doctors? Nuclear firmware upgrades?
  - crusso 8y ago
    Disclosure: I've been a remote worker full-time for the last 5 years. I travel to the office a few days a month. There are many natural reasons why being physically in an office is advantageous. I can have face-to-face meetings with multiple people without conference call issues, I'm available to go visit clients local to the office, interactions with colleagues are just easier due to proximity, I hear the office cross-talk that is unavailable when you're remote, I form closer personal relationships with my colleagues because of countless unplanned interactions, I can perform physical tasks like installing servers, etc. Granted, there are disadvantages to working locally too - but the complex mix of advantages and disadvantages feed into the decisions that everyone makes in how they run their businesses, where they choose to be employed, etc. Does it not concern you that you're advocating overriding all of that decision making with some one-size-fits-all government policy that would criminalize people simply working the way they wish to?
CompelTechnic 8y ago
If you want to make this thread objective and actionable, keep it realistic. There are thriving mid-size cities and towns across the U.S where rent doesn't eat your total paycheck. I live in one of them. The data above supports this. 41% of consumption on total housing category has only moved down slightly, from 42% in 1987. Remote work should be more encouraged, I agree.
saiya-jin 8y ago
Man, I understand your frustration, but you are pushing your own subjective opinions and situation here. When presented with some hard facts, no reaction to them, just another bland "we should" statement that would maybe work great for you. You didn't convince me. Bring some cold hard facts, and I am happy to listen again. For now, whenever I travel I can see millions of people being lifted from utter unimaginable poverty. That means to me more than somebody from 1st world whining on internet forums. And if this lift of the former is at the cost of the latter, so be it even if I am part of it. It's a good direction.

deleted 8y ago

[deleted]

crusso 8y ago

we should stop tolerating failure to hire remote workers What are you suggesting?

rwallace 8y ago
I'm suggesting that we treat discrimination against remote workers the way we treated some other forms of harmful discrimination in hiring: stop doing it, stop accepting or repeating excuses for doing it, stop tolerating companies doing it, and ultimately make it illegal.
- CompelTechnic 8y ago
  Remote workers are not a protected class, and there is no reason to make them a pretected class, considering the reality that lots of jobs require a physical presence. Calling it discrimination implies that there is a permanent population of people who are capable of working, but can only possibly work if they do not have to commute, and that they are being oppressed because of this. It is not discrimination so much as it's a case of society having a different set of preferences than you.
  - ben_w 8y ago
    GP is giving an economic rather than a social justice reason for making it a protected class. I don’t think I agree with him, but that doesn’t make it “not a reason”. Reason I disagree with him is that if workplaces rearrange themselves to not need physical presence, all the jobs suddenly get done by whichever genuinely third world nation can put high bandwidth internet connection into literal shantytown slums the fastest. If this was a gradual and planned-for change, starting with boosting the salary expectations of the poorest in the world up to our level, that’s one thing. Doing it to solve housing cost differences between rural and urban areas in developed nations will just blow up in everyone’s faces with unhandled side-effects.
- tomrod 8y ago
  Sounds like a nice ideal. I'm an economist. The first thing that comes to mind is the technology infrastructure costs required to maintain a potentially all remote workforce. A central location is better for a number of different workstreams. The second thing that comes to mind is unintended consequences. Are all jobs remote? Bakers? Doctors? Nuclear firmware upgrades?
- crusso 8y ago
  Disclosure: I've been a remote worker full-time for the last 5 years. I travel to the office a few days a month. There are many natural reasons why being physically in an office is advantageous. I can have face-to-face meetings with multiple people without conference call issues, I'm available to go visit clients local to the office, interactions with colleagues are just easier due to proximity, I hear the office cross-talk that is unavailable when you're remote, I form closer personal relationships with my colleagues because of countless unplanned interactions, I can perform physical tasks like installing servers, etc. Granted, there are disadvantages to working locally too - but the complex mix of advantages and disadvantages feed into the decisions that everyone makes in how they run their businesses, where they choose to be employed, etc. Does it not concern you that you're advocating overriding all of that decision making with some one-size-fits-all government policy that would criminalize people simply working the way they wish to?

CompelTechnic 8y ago

If you want to make this thread objective and actionable, keep it realistic. There are thriving mid-size cities and towns across the U.S where rent doesn't eat your total paycheck. I live in one of them. The data above supports this. 41% of consumption on total housing category has only moved down slightly, from 42% in 1987. Remote work should be more encouraged, I agree.

saiya-jin 8y ago

Man, I understand your frustration, but you are pushing your own subjective opinions and situation here. When presented with some hard facts, no reaction to them, just another bland "we should" statement that would maybe work great for you. You didn't convince me. Bring some cold hard facts, and I am happy to listen again. For now, whenever I travel I can see millions of people being lifted from utter unimaginable poverty. That means to me more than somebody from 1st world whining on internet forums. And if this lift of the former is at the cost of the latter, so be it even if I am part of it. It's a good direction.