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.
Another topic related to WFH….Google is cutting pay for some employees who choose to remain working from home and/or relocating to less expensive cities to WFH….some of these employees are more than happy to accept that:
“If you want to get paid New York rates, you work in New York. None of this, 'I'm in Colorado ... and getting paid like I'm sitting in New York City. Sorry, that doesn't work," he said.
I'd accept that deal. Not that I hate NYC or anything, I just hate long, grinding commutes to the same office every day.
Long-term, though, I wonder if these companies will realize they should just stop even paying their physical NYC employees NYC wages and just let everyone work remote for the lower pay.
I live in an exurban area but have worked remotely 100% of the time since March 2020. I can be at my employers building in 35 minutes or in the National Forest in 45 minutes. I would never live in the city again if I can avoid it as it is far too hot and crowded for my liking.
Prices are the intersection of supply and demand curves. Any employer claiming otherwise is BSing.
And the geography of an office worked changes the supply and demand curve of a product?
If the output of an employee is worth an $X amount, it’s the same whether in Kansas or San Francisco. It’s just employees screwing over their employees again.
We will never have nationwide income equality when the nation’s wealth is tied to a select few areas, in a select few industries, in a select few jobs.
And the geography of an office worked changes the supply and demand curve of a product?
If the employer is interested in purchasing labor located in that geography, then supply curve will consist of the people that live in that geography who can perform that labor, which will of course vary from place to place. As will the demand curve of employers interested in purchasing that labor.
If the employer is interested in purchasing labor located in that geography, then supply curve will consist of the people that live in that geography who can perform that labor, which will of course vary from place to place. As will the demand curve of employers interested in purchasing that labor.
Except there’s no reason for a lot of jobs to be in a certain area anymore, technology has made this possible. Again not all jobs… but most of them.
There’s no reason for an employer to “purchase people” in San Francisco anymore. They can advertise a job, pick who qualifies, and give them X amount based on their productivity. The employee can choose where they want to be.
Except there’s no reason for a lot of jobs to be in a certain area anymore, technology has made this possible. Again not all jobs… but most of them.
There’s no reason for an employer to “purchase people” in San Francisco anymore. They can advertise a job, pick who qualifies, and give them X amount based on their productivity. The employee can choose where they want to be.
That may all be true, except the “give them X amount based on their productivity”. Buyers give sellers $x because they cannot find a seller to sell to them for $x-1 (adjusted for fungibility and convenience, of course).
When people go to the grocery store, they are not paying prices based on the food’s utility to them, they are paying mostly based on what other grocery stores are willing to sell at.
I assume you live in Texas or Oklahoma, where a bunch of ex-Californias flocks to. I can see working remotely being a negative hindrance to some people since you're still stuck in one room all day.
I doubt its OK because its not a high growth state. In fact, Tulsa has been offering money to get people to move there. Many from Oklahoma end up moving to the Dallas are for opportunities. The two largest casinos in Oklahoma are just cross the Texas border, within 70 miles of downtown Dallas or Fort Worth
I reside in the Dallas, TX area and I am finding the rental market super competitive all over TX. It is also beginning to get competitive in nearby states like Oklahoma, New Mexico, Colorado and Kansas. Landlords are taking advantage of this by raising the rents which makes it more difficult for middle class people to afford a decent place. It is awful.
The Dallas metro has added 177,400 new apartments over the last decade—52,000 in the city alone—while Houston has added 131,300 apartments in the past 10 years, or 83,000 in the city. Suburban apartment supply is also growing fast—eight out of the top 20 suburbs with the most apartment growth over the last five years are located in Texas, with Frisco and McKinney taking the top two spots.
I doubt its OK because its not a high growth state. In fact, Tulsa has been offering money to get people to move there. Many from Oklahoma end up moving to the Dallas are for opportunities. The two largest casinos in Oklahoma are just cross the Texas border, within 70 miles of downtown Dallas or Fort Worth
True, but Oklahoma is in the South Central US. Had he just said Dallas most of us would have believed him since Dallas is one of the fastest-growing metros in the country.
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.
