This article seems very short-sited and simplistic. In general, as other people have pointed out, this usually results in large portions of the population moving to more affordable areas and what you're really describing is gentrification on huge scale. And we know how well gentrification has worked out so far.
Personally I find the idea that this is a "our once-in-a-generation chance for rebalancing the economy" very incorrect. It's a perfect way of rebalancing the economy for people who have the means to easily relocate, but at the expense of everybody else in community.
Also I don't believe this will fix, education, etc. issues regarding lack of access to technology, etc. in smaller communities. You would need equal distribution within these communities for that to work and I see no evidence that that will be the case. Personally, I think it's more likely that certain more affordable but still desirable areas will just be overrun.
I agree there does tend to be a siloing within big cities, but I think this problem is much more complicated than a simplistic jump to remote solution. Personally I'm not even certain if this is a world-wide issues (I would need to see much more data regarding this). It's definitely an issue in American, but there's a lot of reasons for America's current state of affairs and assuming remote work is some how going to fix it is just silly.
In general the bulk of the article isn't related to Deutsche bank tax either so I really don't see what the point in bringing up was, except yet another short-sighted jab at the idea.
I'll point out that I'm not necessarily against the idea of accessible relocation, but your view lacks any depth. And to somehow believe this is what will rebalance the economy is just absurd.
For further actions, you may consider blocking this person and/or reporting abuse
We're a place where coders share, stay up-to-date and grow their careers.
This article seems very short-sited and simplistic. In general, as other people have pointed out, this usually results in large portions of the population moving to more affordable areas and what you're really describing is gentrification on huge scale. And we know how well gentrification has worked out so far.
Personally I find the idea that this is a "our once-in-a-generation chance for rebalancing the economy" very incorrect. It's a perfect way of rebalancing the economy for people who have the means to easily relocate, but at the expense of everybody else in community.
Also I don't believe this will fix, education, etc. issues regarding lack of access to technology, etc. in smaller communities. You would need equal distribution within these communities for that to work and I see no evidence that that will be the case. Personally, I think it's more likely that certain more affordable but still desirable areas will just be overrun.
I agree there does tend to be a siloing within big cities, but I think this problem is much more complicated than a simplistic jump to remote solution. Personally I'm not even certain if this is a world-wide issues (I would need to see much more data regarding this). It's definitely an issue in American, but there's a lot of reasons for America's current state of affairs and assuming remote work is some how going to fix it is just silly.
In general the bulk of the article isn't related to Deutsche bank tax either so I really don't see what the point in bringing up was, except yet another short-sighted jab at the idea.
I'll point out that I'm not necessarily against the idea of accessible relocation, but your view lacks any depth. And to somehow believe this is what will rebalance the economy is just absurd.