5 ms·

I've seen/heard different numbers from elsewhere: 20% want to work from home permanently 20% want to get back to the office full time 60% want flexibility so

I've seen/heard different numbers from elsewhere: 20% want to work from home permanently 20% want to get back to the office full time 60% want flexibility somewhere in between Personally, I think the specific breakdown is less important than companies realizing that letting people be remote can improve work/life balance, reduces office space needs, and they have most of the infrastructure to support it. As an industry, we still need to figure out mentorship and career development for remote/partially-remote teams, but I'm optimistic on that front.

take_a_breath 6y ago
==reduces office space needs== While increasing their employees home-space needs. People will need bigger houses and apartments if everyone is going to work from home long-term.
- neutronicus 6y ago
  Which they will find, for the same price, out in the sticks when they don't need to drive in.
  - take_a_breath 6y ago
    Which suggests we will need to build new houses to satisfy all the demand. Which is exactly the question I was asking. How will those housing needs differ from today's? Will homes need more space for offices? play areas? gardens? bathrooms? Will multi-generational housing come back in-style to support elderly?
    - lliamander 6y ago
      It's a good point. Definitely the need for a separate office. Another important discussion along those lines is the availability of fast, reliable internet.
  - jandrewrogers 6y ago
    Many people don't want to live in the sticks, they have a preference for where they already live.
    - neutronicus 6y ago
      Then they can enjoy their newly-lower rent.
- acituan 6y ago
  People need bigger houses for other reasons too, including a growing family, having space for gathering with their friends and community, for their hobbies etc. And I’m not talking about a luxurious McMansion, just something bigger than a $3500 1 bedroom apartment where you can’t have a friendsgiving with more than 4 guests. Being able to work from home long term means not being tied to ultra-premium land for your private space. Not eating up the externality of your company deciding to hire 10s of thousands more workers in your already crammed city, not being forced to choose between the externality of longer commute time or inflated, subpar housing services.
  - take_a_breath 6y ago
    You are talking about personal reasons that people need more space, which is absolutely true. I am talking about a fundamental shift in how we perform work as a society. If everyone, all at once, starts working from home and avoiding offices, it is reasonable to assume that some of that office space will need to be re-created in houses, which will increase the necessary size for houses. Things like the average size of a new house and the average amenities people include (an extra office, an extra bathroom, a separated "play area", mesh wi-fi friendly, etc.).
  - edm0nd 6y ago
    God damn. $3,500 for a 1br apt. You must for sure live in SF lol. That's enough to purchase a full on mansion here in Louisiana.
    - take_a_breath 6y ago
      It's $500 more than my mortgage for a single-family-home in Chicago.
    - nitrogen 6y ago
      It gets even worse if you want to have your own w/d in a building that isn't 100 years old.
- lliamander 6y ago
  If people have the option to work remotely, they're more likely going to move to places where land is plentiful and cheap.
  - jandrewrogers 6y ago
    That's not helpful for the majority of people that actually like where they live. I live in the middle of a city because I like living in the middle of a city, for reasons that have nothing to do with where I work. Most people are not harboring a secret desire to suddenly move to a completely different type of neighborhood for the cheap land if they no longer have to commute. Being forced to purchase a larger living space because a company decides to go remote is transferring a business cost to the employee. The same goes for being forced to move to a different neighborhood with land that is "plentiful and cheap" because you can't afford to buy a bigger place in your current neighborhood.
    - lliamander 6y ago
      You make some good points. I don't know that your desire matches with the majority of people living in a big city. I mean, I'm sure there are lots of people who do like living there, but there are also lots of people who have moved from elsewhere to big cities specifically for job opportunities. Being in a big city has its advantages (jobs, access to more specialized businesses and ammenities) but also its costs (crime, lack of natural beauty, etc.). I think you may find that, after everyone who wanted to leave the city can, the costs for those who want to remain might settle down.
      - take_a_breath 6y ago
        I’m not saying you’re wrong, but you first need to establish that there is, in fact, a large group of people living in cities because they “have to” for work. I don’t think this can be treated as a fact without some evidence. The power of cities isn’t some US-only phenomenon, it has been the dominant economic engine for centuries.

take_a_breath 6y ago

==reduces office space needs== While increasing their employees home-space needs. People will need bigger houses and apartments if everyone is going to work from home long-term.

neutronicus 6y ago
Which they will find, for the same price, out in the sticks when they don't need to drive in.
- take_a_breath 6y ago
  Which suggests we will need to build new houses to satisfy all the demand. Which is exactly the question I was asking. How will those housing needs differ from today's? Will homes need more space for offices? play areas? gardens? bathrooms? Will multi-generational housing come back in-style to support elderly?
  - lliamander 6y ago
    It's a good point. Definitely the need for a separate office. Another important discussion along those lines is the availability of fast, reliable internet.
- jandrewrogers 6y ago
  Many people don't want to live in the sticks, they have a preference for where they already live.
  - neutronicus 6y ago
    Then they can enjoy their newly-lower rent.
acituan 6y ago
People need bigger houses for other reasons too, including a growing family, having space for gathering with their friends and community, for their hobbies etc. And I’m not talking about a luxurious McMansion, just something bigger than a $3500 1 bedroom apartment where you can’t have a friendsgiving with more than 4 guests. Being able to work from home long term means not being tied to ultra-premium land for your private space. Not eating up the externality of your company deciding to hire 10s of thousands more workers in your already crammed city, not being forced to choose between the externality of longer commute time or inflated, subpar housing services.
- take_a_breath 6y ago
  You are talking about personal reasons that people need more space, which is absolutely true. I am talking about a fundamental shift in how we perform work as a society. If everyone, all at once, starts working from home and avoiding offices, it is reasonable to assume that some of that office space will need to be re-created in houses, which will increase the necessary size for houses. Things like the average size of a new house and the average amenities people include (an extra office, an extra bathroom, a separated "play area", mesh wi-fi friendly, etc.).
- edm0nd 6y ago
  God damn. $3,500 for a 1br apt. You must for sure live in SF lol. That's enough to purchase a full on mansion here in Louisiana.
  - take_a_breath 6y ago
    It's $500 more than my mortgage for a single-family-home in Chicago.
  - nitrogen 6y ago
    It gets even worse if you want to have your own w/d in a building that isn't 100 years old.
lliamander 6y ago
If people have the option to work remotely, they're more likely going to move to places where land is plentiful and cheap.
- jandrewrogers 6y ago
  That's not helpful for the majority of people that actually like where they live. I live in the middle of a city because I like living in the middle of a city, for reasons that have nothing to do with where I work. Most people are not harboring a secret desire to suddenly move to a completely different type of neighborhood for the cheap land if they no longer have to commute. Being forced to purchase a larger living space because a company decides to go remote is transferring a business cost to the employee. The same goes for being forced to move to a different neighborhood with land that is "plentiful and cheap" because you can't afford to buy a bigger place in your current neighborhood.
  - lliamander 6y ago
    You make some good points. I don't know that your desire matches with the majority of people living in a big city. I mean, I'm sure there are lots of people who do like living there, but there are also lots of people who have moved from elsewhere to big cities specifically for job opportunities. Being in a big city has its advantages (jobs, access to more specialized businesses and ammenities) but also its costs (crime, lack of natural beauty, etc.). I think you may find that, after everyone who wanted to leave the city can, the costs for those who want to remain might settle down.
    - take_a_breath 6y ago
      I’m not saying you’re wrong, but you first need to establish that there is, in fact, a large group of people living in cities because they “have to” for work. I don’t think this can be treated as a fact without some evidence. The power of cities isn’t some US-only phenomenon, it has been the dominant economic engine for centuries.