Live data from Hacker News

Let People Move to Jobs

jefftk.com

151–160 of 314 posts

Re: Let People Move to Jobs

#151

This argument has been made for decades. Isn't it about time we realised that people live somewhere amongst social capital they have built up throughout their lives. And therefore business capital should move where the people are - to avoid damaging that social capital. Not the other way around. Ultimately people work to live. Those who live to work are a tiny minority. With modern technology there is little excuse.…

I'd argue that the average person lives in order to work. It is ingrained in our minds from an early age, and why we have not gone down to a 15 hour week that was first proposed as the path ahead by Keynes in 1930.

In the FIRE community you would find that the majority of people are working in order to live.

Most people with consumer debt are trapped in this too.

Re: Let People Move to Jobs

#152

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The only reason this happens is because of (perhaps misguided) attempts to resist the changes caused by population growth from local voters. If it was up to the market to decide, what would happen if there was a sudden spike in the demand for housing? Developers would build more housing. Prices might move a bit, but you’re not going to be looking at a crisis. However, entrenched homeowners don’t want that, because it…

Isn't that an example of functional local democracy? Why bother make your town a mess in the name of growth. In SF's case the external pressure just was to huge and they should have given up long time ago keeping it a low built city.

> Why bother make your town a mess in the name of growth.

Yeah, and why bother making the country a mess by letting foreigners into your country?

People moving for opportunity is a fundamental part of what America is. To deny others opportunities that you have by virtue of birthplace is nativism, and it's ugly.

Sure, it sounds relatively harmless when it's "just your town", but you can look at the bay area and see what happens when everyone behaves this way for their neighborhood or city. Massive rents, struggling families, hideously long commutes: all the result of NIMBYism.

Re: Let People Move to Jobs

#153
The whole idea of remote working to arbitrage cost of living falls apart if you are in any way social.

I think that a lot of people banging on about remote work just haven't tried it for an extended period. It works for some, and for those - great.

To me, it's just another step down the 'technification' of everything in which people don't speak to the people around them (because they've been 'removed' from their lives) but spend all of their time in front of screens.

I don't want to live in the middle of nowhere and earn 10x what the average local does. I want the people around me to be roughly on my level and share my interests. That's something that's easy to do in a city.

That's how businesses end up centering in hubs anyway. Who wants to be a startup founder living in the country alone? I'm sure this person exists, but they're the exception not the rule.

I mean, right now, you can look at a place like London and see hyperlocal clustering of wealth, one street will be the 'nice street' and the next one rough. People really care about this.

If you earned a London salary in my hometown you'd be ostracising yourself completely from those around you by virtue of just having none of the same concerns. Yeah, you own the home outright, you can buy a brand new car every 6 months, the price tags in the supermarket may as well be blank, etc. Oh yeah, and you have working hours whenever you want, booking a holiday is telling your boss "I won't be in Friday, guv". Wait until your neighbour tells you again how they're struggling to pay the bills or they've just been sanctioned by the benefits office.

I don't see how that benefits anyone.

Re: Let People Move to Jobs

#154

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Offshore does not equal cheaper. Often what you think you save in salary, you spend in communication overheads.

What communication overhead, if you've already said you are in favor of telecommuting?

Communicating across differences in language, culture and just simple local knowledge - in other words, considerable overhead.

Re: Let People Move to Jobs

#155

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Once upon a time, a rising tide of economic progress would lift all boats in all communities all around the country. I think this hasn't been true for centuries. Moving rural to the cities has been documented since the 1700's very clearly by economists.

It may be true that all boats were being lifted before, but some more than others. Or at least the gap between the boats wasn’t as big as it is now.

I think the Communist Manifesto was written precisely because not all boats were being lifted.

Re: Let People Move to Jobs

#156

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What communication overhead, if you've already said you are in favor of telecommuting?

Communicating across differences in language, culture and just simple local knowledge - in other words, considerable overhead.

True for offshoring to (for example) India, but almost negligible for offshoring to many parts of Europe.

Re: Let People Move to Jobs

#157

This argument has been made for decades. Isn't it about time we realised that people live somewhere amongst social capital they have built up throughout their lives. And therefore business capital should move where the people are - to avoid damaging that social capital. Not the other way around. Ultimately people work to live. Those who live to work are a tiny minority. With modern technology there is little excuse.…

> Isn't it about time we realised that people live somewhere amongst social capital they have built up throughout their lives. It's often the case, but SF, NYC, London are very popular outliers, so why can't other regions be? It's not social capital, it's expected quality of life that makes people move to NYC for work and makes dilapidated areas unattractive.

> ...it's expected quality of life that makes people move to NYC for work and makes dilapidated areas unattractive.

I can't speak to Britain, but in the U.S. there are more people that do not live in SF or NYC than do. Other than people with niche interests (musical theater, startups, finance), most Americans, even young adults, aren't sitting around wondering how they can swing a big move to New York City.

It's much more normal to move to a regional big city, but in those cases the jobs are likely outside the city center as downtown. It's worth noting that NY and California would be stagnating if it weren't for immigration. Immigrants seem to be the ones who see places like SF and NYC as their big chance for a new quality of life.

Re: Let People Move to Jobs

#158

The whole idea of remote working to arbitrage cost of living falls apart if you are in any way social. I think that a lot of people banging on about remote work just haven't tried it for an extended period. It works for some, and for those - great. To me, it's just another step down the 'technification' of everything in which people don't speak to the people around them (because they've been 'removed' from their live…

> The whole idea of remote working to arbitrage cost of living falls apart if you are in any way social.

Unless you grew up in the area from which you work remotely, in which case you can be more social because connecting with old friends and family is much easier than making new friends at 30+.

> If I earned a London salary in my hometown I'd be ostracising myself completely from those around me [...] I don't see how that benefits anyone.

I don't see the problem with having more money than most of your neighbors - instead of buying new cars, you could spend it on your neighborhood and lift it up. Seems healthier than what is happening instead - non-techies being forced out of their homes because they can't keep up with techie rents.

Re: Let People Move to Jobs

#159

This argument has been made for decades. Isn't it about time we realised that people live somewhere amongst social capital they have built up throughout their lives. And therefore business capital should move where the people are - to avoid damaging that social capital. Not the other way around. Ultimately people work to live. Those who live to work are a tiny minority. With modern technology there is little excuse.…

Technology doesn't seem to be (in terms of what people can cheaply get hold of) there yet though? Amd as soon as it does get there, you'd arbitrage to third world guys not Western guys who want to live in Thaliand.

We're in a situation where we have offshore (Indian) tech hires and it's hard to coordinate on technical matters, even in a company where we have unlimited access to fancy VC rooms. When we flew them over for a bit everything was far easier. My boss thinks expensive digital whiteboards would make a big difference, but actually more than the money there's a political/social cost to buying big, visible things to sit in public sight in an office.

So why would you hire a Western guy for 3x the price and pay the exact same communication cost? Western and sitting in the same building or 3rd world country no other option seems to make sense.

Re: Let People Move to Jobs

#160

The whole idea of remote working to arbitrage cost of living falls apart if you are in any way social. I think that a lot of people banging on about remote work just haven't tried it for an extended period. It works for some, and for those - great. To me, it's just another step down the 'technification' of everything in which people don't speak to the people around them (because they've been 'removed' from their live…

> I don't want to live in the middle of nowhere and earn 10x what the average local does. I want the people around me to be roughly on my level and share my interests.

You're clearly not a camper or a bow hunter, and you clearly have no particular attraction to pickup trucks.

Point being, your generalization is actually pretty specific to your set of interests. Other folks couldn't imagine not owning a car, getting rid of their dogs, or having to plan a special trip to go fishing.

Post reply on HN