I know economists talk about people choosing places to live in terms of "amenities," and businesses want to headquarter where people want to live. At what poin

I know economists talk about people choosing places to live in terms of "amenities," and businesses want to headquarter where people want to live. At what point is it cheaper to import amenities to, I dunno, Wyoming than to keep fighting the rising costs and politics of the metropolis? I guess the answer is basically never? I wonder how much it would cost to keep the museums and clubs running with a lower population, just a whole planned city of entertainment... (Maybe because businesses also benefit from sharing a tradeable talent pool with other similar businesses...)