Western housing shortages do not just prevent many from ever affording their own home. They also drive inequality, climate change, low productivity growth, obesity, and even falling fertility rates.
The article assumes that “high productivity” areas are somehow inherently that way. It seems like that’s just where companies choose to open offices? I’ve long wondered why more companies don’t...
The article assumes that “high productivity” areas are somehow inherently that way. It seems like that’s just where companies choose to open offices? I’ve long wondered why more companies don’t choose to open offices in lower-rent areas.
To some extent, network effect. NY/Boston/DC/LA/Seattle/SF all have a large concentration of universities and government institutions that provide the necessary “infrastructure” to create and...
To some extent, network effect. NY/Boston/DC/LA/Seattle/SF all have a large concentration of universities and government institutions that provide the necessary “infrastructure” to create and sustain the type of companies in those areas. Highly educated employees move in, demanding a certain type of culture/politics that the area provides, attracting more employees (and potentials through higher education), continuing the cycle.
As an example in Georgia: In spite of the lower costs of the former, there are difficulties in attracting people to move to Augusta versus Atlanta, even though the Augusta area has several major institutions attracting educated workers (SRS, Plant Vogtle, the Medical District, and Fort Gordon); Atlanta simply has more of those, plus more universities to feed them. I know a few younger coworkers who don’t want to stay in the area for long (the very conservative politics and lack of nightlife and entertainment options weigh heavily on that).
Possibly, but given the degree to which the network effects are a result of incidental interactions between people who wouldn't otherwise run into each other, I'd expect the more intentional...
Possibly, but given the degree to which the network effects are a result of incidental interactions between people who wouldn't otherwise run into each other, I'd expect the more intentional interactions of remote work to have a less significant impact.
I wouldn’t expect remote work alone to be enough to create a new hub, but it seems like it would help in combination with the interactions available in university towns, etc. And there was a time...
I wouldn’t expect remote work alone to be enough to create a new hub, but it seems like it would help in combination with the interactions available in university towns, etc. And there was a time when big companies created new campuses away from city center.
There are a lot of smaller cities and towns that are trying to get something going. It seems like it’s in everyone’s interests to try to help them succeed. This includes the big metropolises that are plagued with high rents. Think of it as load balancing rather than competition.
The article assumes that “high productivity” areas are somehow inherently that way. It seems like that’s just where companies choose to open offices? I’ve long wondered why more companies don’t choose to open offices in lower-rent areas.
To some extent, network effect. NY/Boston/DC/LA/Seattle/SF all have a large concentration of universities and government institutions that provide the necessary “infrastructure” to create and sustain the type of companies in those areas. Highly educated employees move in, demanding a certain type of culture/politics that the area provides, attracting more employees (and potentials through higher education), continuing the cycle.
As an example in Georgia: In spite of the lower costs of the former, there are difficulties in attracting people to move to Augusta versus Atlanta, even though the Augusta area has several major institutions attracting educated workers (SRS, Plant Vogtle, the Medical District, and Fort Gordon); Atlanta simply has more of those, plus more universities to feed them. I know a few younger coworkers who don’t want to stay in the area for long (the very conservative politics and lack of nightlife and entertainment options weigh heavily on that).
The article clearly says that the network effects are the source of the improvement in productivity, and links to sources.
Yes, but that doesn’t mean networks can’t grow new nodes. The rise of remote work should be helping with that.
Possibly, but given the degree to which the network effects are a result of incidental interactions between people who wouldn't otherwise run into each other, I'd expect the more intentional interactions of remote work to have a less significant impact.
I wouldn’t expect remote work alone to be enough to create a new hub, but it seems like it would help in combination with the interactions available in university towns, etc. And there was a time when big companies created new campuses away from city center.
There are a lot of smaller cities and towns that are trying to get something going. It seems like it’s in everyone’s interests to try to help them succeed. This includes the big metropolises that are plagued with high rents. Think of it as load balancing rather than competition.