Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I find it interesting how location counts more then ever despite the fact that a majority of jobs can be done totally remotely in this service economy.
Especially with the job structure in these huge cities, 80% or more of those jobs don't even need an office.
Other then jobs in the mining, logging, construction, manufacturing and trade, transportation and logistics industries most jobs don't need people working a physical office.
Despite this the premium to live in certain cities is higher then it has ever been.
For example one could afford 3 median single-family homes in Toledo, Ohio and then 3 more median single-family homes in Ocala, FL for the the price of 1 single-family home with astronomical taxes in Orange County, California.
I love California and all but Ohio other then awful weather has the same big-box stores without all the hassle as California.
Someone could buy 7 single family homes in Cumberland, MD with lush mountain views just a few hours from all the action on the East Coast for the price of 1 single family home in Boulder, Colorado which has much more snowfall, nice but not nearly as scenery as Cumberland and isolated with only Denver in close proximity.
I find it very interesting because most of these cheap, small metropolitan areas have all the big-box retail that all these luxury, in-demand metropolitan areas have.
I find it interesting how location counts more then ever despite the fact that a majority of jobs can be done totally remotely in this service economy.
Especially with the job structure in these huge cities, 80% or more of those jobs don't even need an office.
Other then jobs in the mining, logging, construction, manufacturing and trade, transportation and logistics industries most jobs don't need people working a physical office.
Despite this the premium to live in certain cities is higher then it has ever been.
For example one could afford 3 median single-family homes in Toledo, Ohio and then 3 more median single-family homes in Ocala, FL for the the price of 1 single-family home with astronomical taxes in Orange County, California.
I love California and all but Ohio other then awful weather has the same big-box stores without all the hassle as California.
Someone could buy 7 single family homes in Cumberland, MD with lush mountain views just a few hours from all the action on the East Coast for the price of 1 single family home in Boulder, Colorado which has much more snowfall, nice but not nearly as scenery as Cumberland and isolated with only Denver in close proximity.
I find it very interesting because most of these cheap, small metropolitan areas have all the big-box retail that all these luxury, in-demand metropolitan areas have.
I think it has more to do with other things than big box stores, which by the way, is something that not everyone likes.
'Most' jobs can't be done remotely. The ones that can - companies often still want their employees together in an office for control/planning/management/collaboration.
I would argue that the most expensive/wealthiest parts of any metro actually have a higher percentage of people who work remotely or partly from home.
Ditto above. Your tripping point is "most." Even some of those jobs that can be remote, there are those companies that will not allow it and others that may require being within certain response time areas of the company office.
There is also the hardware issues with security and connectivity that can be concerns for remote operation to many companies as well.
Physical proximity to similar companies is a big plus for many employers and workers, even if the work can be done remotely. Clustering of these companies in a specifc locale btings many benefits to all, especially as a firm grows. It's exlained well in this article (Clustering | The Economist) of which an excerpt is below:
"Economists explain clustering as a means for small companies to enjoy some of the economies of scale (see article) usually reserved for large ones. An isolated greenfield site in a depressed region where government grants are plentiful may bring a young company immediate benefits. But in the longer term the young company may be better off squeezing itself onto an expensive piece of urban real estate in close proximity to a significant number of its competitors.
By sticking together, firms are able to benefit from such things as the neighbourhood's pool of expertise and skilled workers; its easy access to component suppliers (Toyota's suppliers generally cluster round the mother company's factories, wherever they may be); and its information channels (both formal ones like trade magazines and informal ones like everyday gossip in neighbourhood bars)."
And as an area gains prominence for a particular industry workers will be attracted to it -- though without enough residential construction to meet the new arrivals, housing prices can often rise dramatically, like they are now doing in Silicon Valley.
In the desirable areas like Orange Co, CA; Seattle, WA; Aspen, CO; etc. there are many residents who work from home. They are typically in IT professions. These are the folks that have the time and money to enjoy all the recreation the area has to offer. My experience job hunting in such cities is that there are mostly very high paying professions that require specialization (i.e. IT) or minimum wage service jobs. The jobs in between are waaay more competitive and often end up getting people who are overqualified.
I think it has more to do with other things than big box stores, which by the way, is something that not everyone likes.
Pretty much this.
Yeah, I mean, if all you care about is proximity to Target and Lowe's, then I guess any ol' place will do. And truthfully, many parts of the country are pretty similar, just with different scenery.
But the most expensive markets offer something that's just special. Something you really CAN'T get anywhere else. And for the people who can afford to live there, it's worth the price.
Even with jobs that can be done remotely travel to the office is still required regularly. Also many people need to travel to visit clients. I don't think that many jobs can be done 100% remotely. I believe that nothing will replace face to face contact, I don't believe that 80% of white collar jobs can be done remotely.
There's also a difference between *can* be done remotely and *is allowed* to be done remotely. My company has always felt that as long as they're paying real estate costs, they want butts in chairs. That doesn't mean that's the right or best attitude, but it's a fairly common one.
I find it interesting how location counts more then ever despite the fact that a majority of jobs can be done totally remotely in this service economy.
Especially with the job structure in these huge cities, 80% or more of those jobs don't even need an office.
Other then jobs in the mining, logging, construction, manufacturing and trade, transportation and logistics industries most jobs don't need people working a physical office.
Despite this the premium to live in certain cities is higher then it has ever been.
For example one could afford 3 median single-family homes in Toledo, Ohio and then 3 more median single-family homes in Ocala, FL for the the price of 1 single-family home with astronomical taxes in Orange County, California.
I love California and all but Ohio other then awful weather has the same big-box stores without all the hassle as California.
Someone could buy 7 single family homes in Cumberland, MD with lush mountain views just a few hours from all the action on the East Coast for the price of 1 single family home in Boulder, Colorado which has much more snowfall, nice but not nearly as scenery as Cumberland and isolated with only Denver in close proximity.
I find it very interesting because most of these cheap, small metropolitan areas have all the big-box retail that all these luxury, in-demand metropolitan areas have.
Some jobs can be done remotely. Certainly not most.
And even then, just because a job can be done remotely, does not mean an employer is willing to hire someone to do it remotely. Most organizations still use "Butts in chairs for 40 hrs/wk" as a management metric. They don't trust their employees and they don't know how to manage any differently. My last job was remote, and the CEO was constantly freaking out about it. Execs generally don't like paying people $$ when they can't see them in the office 8+hrs/day.
Last I heard, on a survey, it was something like 5% of employers who would consider remote workers.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
