If tech elites are making this call on behalf of generations-old communities, what jobs they’re allowed to have locally——sounds a little like a communist, plann

If tech elites are making this call on behalf of generations-old communities, what jobs they’re allowed to have locally——sounds a little like a communist, planned economy, where some districts are assigned to have certain gainful opportunities and others are assigned to not have them——based on their own value judgements and informal conversations, it’s the height of arrogance for them to reason that only they can keep the social structure from fracturing in a tight-knit community of which they were never a part. Why not put it to a vote at the community level, out of respect for community autonomy, economic freedom, and democratic values? I can tell you that the people who are close enough to their children for them to want to stay around would never say no to a job opportunity that lets them do just that without sacrificing their career to do so. To boot, these communities generally have been home to at least some remote workers for decades already, but much of tech has fallen ill to narcissism in believing that it is somehow too special / important to also provide such an opportunity. The majority of people who choose to live in their hometown, over a flashier place that they could also afford, are doing it out of love for their community, not out of some anti-social tendency to take advantage of it as you suggest. Perhaps some decision makers, somewhere, got where they are through a self-selection bias, and are projecting their own psychological quirks onto others. There are a great many people whose families have roughly stayed put for generations. Your reasoning / dismissiveness / lack of care for these people shows a lack of insight or a tendency to marginalize the concerns of people from rural America.