4 ms·

> Giving people computers Better is simply giving people money which they can use for their highest priorities, which may not be computers. > Access to broadb

by xapata 6y ago

> Giving people computers Better is simply giving people money which they can use for their highest priorities, which may not be computers. > Access to broadband Competitive internet is available in larger metropolitan areas. If there's a mandate for some or all companies to provide access in rural areas, that must be subsidized by increased prices in metropolitan areas. This was accepted in the US for the bulk of the 20th century for the phone system, and resulted in amazing scientific discoveries from Bell Labs. One alternative to a rural internet bandwidth subsidy would be subsidizing relocation. Rather than encouraging people to continue to live where jobs are scarce and services are expensive, we could encourage them to move to where labor is scarce and services are competitively priced. > governments can nudge them into the WFH model What's the transition cost for switching from in-office to at-home employees? If it's not an issue of transition cost, I don't think the government should be in the business of subsidizing in-home employment on an ongoing basis. It would distort the market, discouraging jobs from hair dresser to dental assistant, thereby making those services more expensive (relatively).

lukejduncan 6y ago
"Competitive internet is available in larger metropolitan areas." I'd debate the competitive qualifier.
- xapata 6y ago
  True. Some large metros are effectively owned by a monopoly. I'm lucky to live in a city with competitive broadband.
kaitai 6y ago
Employers should provide computers to employees who are WFH. It's the cost of doing business. Schools need to provide students with computers or computer access, as well; the coronavirus has certainly thrown a wrench into traditional distribution methods. Competitive internet in the US is almost an oxymoron. I have two choices here, and they magically always set the same price, which is no cheaper now than ten years ago. I can walk to a cocktail, a pour-over coffee, boutiques, and my choice of macaron or Parisian-style croissant, but I cannot get cheap and high-bandwidth internet. Subsidizing relocation is not the best alternative. Farming regions already suffer from a shortage of labor. It would be far better for one of a family to be able to get a good tech job while another in the family farms than the current state of affairs, where I know a farmer who actually commutes by his private plane to his second job as a college instructor. Farming is important, because food is important. No other service is expensive there, unless you want a Brazilian keratin treatment or something. Relocating the last of America's farmers is not a great answer. Last, I will get my teeth looked at as soon as it's possible, whether I'm WFH or not. You only get one set of adult teeth.
- xapata 6y ago
  What does it mean to suffer from a shortage of labor? As an economist, it's hard to understand that phrase. I usually take it to mean that an employer doesn't want to pay the prevailing wage, or dislikes the trend of wage increases. Given that understanding, there most intense "shortage" is where labor is most expensive. That means in the city, and for highly skilled workers. As for your teeth, I suggest an early morning appointment. Aerosolized virus can live in the air for quite some time, which is what you get when you use a high speed drill in someone's mouth. It's unclear what viral load you'd get from being the next patient in the chair, but I wouldn't want to be the guinea pig.
  - newsclues 6y ago
    Not enough people to do they available work. If the youth leave and don’t come back, rural areas slowly die.
    - xapata 6y ago
      I think the cause is the other way around. The villages disappear because there's no work to do, not that there's no people to do work. Modern agriculture, mining, and manufacturing don't employ many people. We already subsidize farmers to not grow so much that they flood the market. It's reasonable that production capacity should shrink and prices rise. Some prices are currently propped up by regulation.
      - newsclues 6y ago
        The economics of subsidies are one thing but... I grew up in a rural area with family farms. The farms are viable businesses that feed people. Farmers kids go away to school and few of them return to be farmers, and it’s hard to bring in workers (commute times, lack of housing) so despite there being work, people leave. Technology and automation have played a role but there is more work than people
        6y ago

by xapata 6y ago

lukejduncan 6y ago

"Competitive internet is available in larger metropolitan areas." I'd debate the competitive qualifier.

xapata 6y ago
True. Some large metros are effectively owned by a monopoly. I'm lucky to live in a city with competitive broadband.

kaitai 6y ago

Employers should provide computers to employees who are WFH. It's the cost of doing business. Schools need to provide students with computers or computer access, as well; the coronavirus has certainly thrown a wrench into traditional distribution methods. Competitive internet in the US is almost an oxymoron. I have two choices here, and they magically always set the same price, which is no cheaper now than ten years ago. I can walk to a cocktail, a pour-over coffee, boutiques, and my choice of macaron or Parisian-style croissant, but I cannot get cheap and high-bandwidth internet. Subsidizing relocation is not the best alternative. Farming regions already suffer from a shortage of labor. It would be far better for one of a family to be able to get a good tech job while another in the family farms than the current state of affairs, where I know a farmer who actually commutes by his private plane to his second job as a college instructor. Farming is important, because food is important. No other service is expensive there, unless you want a Brazilian keratin treatment or something. Relocating the last of America's farmers is not a great answer. Last, I will get my teeth looked at as soon as it's possible, whether I'm WFH or not. You only get one set of adult teeth.

xapata 6y ago
What does it mean to suffer from a shortage of labor? As an economist, it's hard to understand that phrase. I usually take it to mean that an employer doesn't want to pay the prevailing wage, or dislikes the trend of wage increases. Given that understanding, there most intense "shortage" is where labor is most expensive. That means in the city, and for highly skilled workers. As for your teeth, I suggest an early morning appointment. Aerosolized virus can live in the air for quite some time, which is what you get when you use a high speed drill in someone's mouth. It's unclear what viral load you'd get from being the next patient in the chair, but I wouldn't want to be the guinea pig.
- newsclues 6y ago
  Not enough people to do they available work. If the youth leave and don’t come back, rural areas slowly die.
  - xapata 6y ago
    I think the cause is the other way around. The villages disappear because there's no work to do, not that there's no people to do work. Modern agriculture, mining, and manufacturing don't employ many people. We already subsidize farmers to not grow so much that they flood the market. It's reasonable that production capacity should shrink and prices rise. Some prices are currently propped up by regulation.
    - newsclues 6y ago
      The economics of subsidies are one thing but... I grew up in a rural area with family farms. The farms are viable businesses that feed people. Farmers kids go away to school and few of them return to be farmers, and it’s hard to bring in workers (commute times, lack of housing) so despite there being work, people leave. Technology and automation have played a role but there is more work than people
      - 6y ago