Politicians and economists lament that certain alpha regions — SF, LA, NYC, Boston, Toronto, London, Paris — attract all the best jobs while becoming repellently expensive, reducing economic mobility and contributing to further bifurcation between haves and have-nots. But why don't the best jobs move elsewhere?
Of course, many of them can't. The average financier in NYC or London (until Brexit annihilates London's banking industry, of course...) would be laughed out of the office, and not invited back, if they told their boss they wanted to henceforth work from Chiang Mai.
But this isn't true of (much of) the software field. The average web/app developer might have such a request declined; but they would not be laughed at, or fired. The demand for good developers greatly outstrips supply, and in this era of Skype and Slack, there's nothing about software development that requires meatspace interactions.
[...]Some people will tell you that remote teams are inherently less effective and productive than localized ones, or that "serendipitous collisions" are so important that every employee must be forced to the same physical location every day so that these collisions can be manufactured. These people are wrong, as long as the team in question is small — on the order of handfuls, dozens or scores, rather than hundreds or thousands — and flexible.
Because the feedlot isn't hiring for Ruby?
(Score: 3, Insightful) by NewNic on Tuesday April 04 2017, @11:32PM (3 children)
Perhaps the "best*" cities become the most expensive.
* For whatever defines "best" in the minds of the people who live there.
lib·er·tar·i·an·ism ˌlibərˈterēənizəm/ noun: Magical thinking that useful idiots mistake for serious political theory
(Score: 3, Insightful) by bob_super on Tuesday April 04 2017, @11:46PM
There's clearly a "because they can" element, due to higher tech salaries.
*Why do top bankers and CEOs flock to the most expensive penthouses?*
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday April 05 2017, @06:37PM (1 child)
no no no, the free market doesn't apply in the case of what places are better. cheap, rural places are BETTER because....??? the 2nd amendment? i mean, just better because reasons.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday April 05 2017, @07:35PM
I assume you are the same AC from above. Again, you're pushing your anti-gun agenda to ensure you've been heard. Again, your comment was a waste of disk space. You didn't care to offer a thought out opinion, it was an attempt at poor humor to degrade people who don't believe precisely as you do. I ask once more... why? Why did you take the time to put in a completely redundant and unneeded comment? What about people exercising their rights on their own time, dime and property irks you so badly that you have to prowl internet sites to proclaim your distaste to any who will read? You not only post your distaste but attempt to poorly ridicule those who do not also share your beliefs and opinions. If you are not a teenager or younger you should be ashamed. If you are a teenager or younger, I urge you to re-examine your priorities in life so you might be a more well-rounded person in the future.