3 ms·
Ironically WFH, whilst being forced to a local actually makes it more expensive. You could live in a tiny studio when your office was available. So now you must
by maerF0x0 6y ago
Ironically WFH, whilst being forced to a local actually makes it more expensive. You could live in a tiny studio when your office was available. So now you must rent a sufficient space to include your home office -- In a locale where the price per sq ft is higher.
someone invent a murphy bed that converts to a desk that converts to a toilet so our workforce can live in a space smaller than solitary confinement.
- gotaran 6y agoI wonder how the calculus plays out. You could be local but within "commuting distance" of the office, which could include Sacramento, Tracy, etc. for an SF office. I think you could get a 2BR in Sac for the price of a studio in SF. We might also see some exodus from the Bay Area, which would put a downward pressure on tech salaries till they hit some equilibrium. I also wonder what enforcement mechanisms exist short of an IRS audit to make sure you're actually "local" and not in a cheap cabin in North Dakota. Employers could monitor corp traffic, but I wonder if it's actually worth the cost to enforce and they'll just go by honor code.
- maerF0x0 6y agoI too wonder about the equilibrium. I have heard that SF rents are down 20%, Which is probably understating the issue because many landlords opt for vacancy over lower prices (due to how loans work and the difficulty of raising once started).