at least here in europe, the real talent (as opposed to business-people) in my experience doesn't care a lot (why should you, if you're a workaholic) about wher

at least here in europe, the real talent (as opposed to business-people) in my experience doesn't care a lot (why should you, if you're a workaholic) about where they work, except that I know a lot of people who don't want to move a lot. What's happening instead is Google importing a 1000 employees, paying them half of SoCal (but still double the rate of local companies in the past - thougbhthe profit/employee wage ratio is probably similar, so....) and the admin-people cheer because it's such a nice cheap city. Students and service workers are less convinced about that idea of "we need this good jobs". I'm also courious who owns the land, if we are not doing private, individual ownership. What's the argument for having a (privately-owned) company own the land instead of just leasing it from the government for some dozen years and developing it? I agree that the current market-based, everyone own a home approach is really inefficient, but to reintroduce surveillance capitalistic serfdom (serve your masters, because they own everything) seems like the wrong way to go... EDIT: well, spent the hungover morning researching Google comp and if glassdoor & linkedin are correct, they actually pay a quite normal salary for basic SWEs, which also explains why they like to import a lot of people and none of the locals I know work there...