3 ms·

This is the real point of opportunity. Is it though? If you take away the offices, and offices close, why do people need to live there? Where will they work?

• ghaff 4y ago
  Some people do choose to live in cities even though there's no work-related reason to do so--and even put up with incremental inconvenience to commute out to a suburban office park. But, still, when tallying up the pros and cons, taking easier commute off the plate certainly doesn't help the urban apartment side of the ledger.
  • b112 4y ago
    I wonder for a place like SanFran. There are many smaller cities, and cities without as many issues as SanFran too. So with remote, there is also the choice of "better managed city". I wonder if it will empty, or become some apocalyptic landscape, with endless abandoned empty office buildings, and the homeless living in them, and everyone else just gone. It seems, from the comments here, that SanFran is very poorly run. The robberies, the homeless, the filth on the street, and now, emptiness and presumably maybe budget problems soon. For example, what if some of the older office buildings are just cut+run? Property management corp X goes bankrupt, or, just decides that it's not worth paying property tax any more. Sure, the city can seize and sell off property for back tax reclamation, but what if no one even wants to buy? What if eventually 1/2 the office space is just owned by the city, decaying, no property tax, unmaintained? It could become Detroit, but worse.