4 ms·
Remote doesn't necessarily mean "living in the middle of nowhere". Case in point: I've moved to a city 40% the size of the one I grew up in so as to be able to
by Tade0 3y ago
Remote doesn't necessarily mean "living in the middle of nowhere".
Case in point: I've moved to a city 40% the size of the one I grew up in so as to be able to afford housing at all and it's been great. A friend who stayed there recently purchased a 25% smaller apartment for 40% more in comparison to mine. It's not even funny at this point.
You have generally more time for all the things you mentioned when you don't commute 2h a day.
As for new homes: even now investment demand will gobble up any new housing that's built, as the former grows much faster than the latter. Induced demand for housing if you will.
- kiba 3y agoRemote work isn't really a solution. Cities exists because they do something economically and socially valuable for humans. It becomes possible to support some infrastructures and services, such as theater, grocery stores, etc. All remote work does is distribute some functions to less populated areas without solving the core problems that plague modern cities everywhere with gridlock and vetocracy. Otherwise, remote works would still be roughly be distributed to the same cities instead of going elsewhere. If we want to unlock the most value, then yes we do want to solve commute 2 hours a day, especially for people who still need to commute. Yes, we do want cheaper housing in the most desirable cities. Yes, we want those remote workers living there anyway.
- Tade0 3y agoMy sentiment is that we've been getting diminishing returns from cities for quite a few years now and it's time to put some pressure on those who benefit the most from the current situation. It so happens that the same people insist that we all, especially specialists with considerable disposable income, return to offices. To reiterate a point I already stated: you won't get cheaper housing when it's seen as an opportunity for passive income. Only making these properties valued less can help here and remote work is the tool for that.
- A4ET8a8uTh0 3y ago<< Cities exists because they do something economically and socially valuable for humans. And they will continue to exist. Because of remote, they will maybe shrink in size, which is not a bad thing. << If we want to unlock the most value, then yes we do want to solve commute 2 hours a day, especially for people who still need to commute. And that part is definitely solved by remote.
- MomoXenosaga 3y agoThis is what anti city people don't get. My mom grew up in a small religious village and left for the big city because she wanted a life.