3 ms·
And why aren't we doing anything to address that distribution? If the employers are having to lay exorbitant salaries so people can afford housing, shouldn't th
by giantg2 3y ago
And why aren't we doing anything to address that distribution? If the employers are having to lay exorbitant salaries so people can afford housing, shouldn't they be looking at opting offices in other cities to reduce their cost? If not, the system is broken and the leaders are poor. In my opinion the leaders should be looking where they are creating jobs as part of their societal duties, maybe even put it under DEI (as worthless as the DEI programs tend to turn out in practice, maybe not).
- jltsiren 3y agoEveryone is already doing that, which is exactly the problem. When every leader is trying to make their city/company more competitive, the ones that are already competitive will win. They can do more, because they have more money. If you want to fight the market, you need centralization. You tax everyone and use the collected money to subsidize a limited number of cities with unrealized potential. Selecting the winners is essential. The more evenly you spread the money, the less effect it will have.
- giantg2 3y ago"Everyone is already doing that, which is exactly the problem." I'm not seeing that. I'm seeing concentration and not social equity focused distribution. "You tax everyone and use the collected money to subsidize a limited number of cities with unrealized potential." There are already cities with untapped opportunities. In my opinion the reason rhey remain untapped is because leaders don't care. They'd rather follow group-think.