[avocabros]

WFH is one solution, but it's not free in terms of collaboration costs. There's a reason no one thinks college is better remote, for example. Sure, it's fine for some jobs but it's not super obvious that it's a net positive for output.

People can also live closer to work, or use other methods (biking, running, etc.) to combine exercise + commute. Many studies have indicate that people overestimate the happiness of a larger house and underestimate the daily happiness toll of a long commute

[piva00]

> People can also live closer to work

That's getting unrealistic since it's becoming unaffordable even for well-paid salaried jobs, it's a non-solution given the current housing situation in most of the major cities where jobs actually are.

> WFH is one solution, but it's not free in terms of collaboration costs.

Why should the employee bear the costs of it though? If collaboration is better in-person what can employers do to enable that? I shouldn't be paying with my lifetime for the eventual benefit the corporation gets with in-person work, I surely wasn't happier nor more productive when I had to work in crappy open-plan offices with all its distractions: people passing by, doors being open/closed, chatter from other groups, interruptions from people wanting to ask questions right-the-fucking-now, having to work 100% of the time with headphones to be able to focus, etc. On top of that I had to pay the commute both in cash and time, the only way I'm going back to the office is if there's a significant increase in pay to compensate the inconvenience.

The increase in pay can come as a 4-day work week as well, then I wouldn't mind at all going back to the office even if my commute is 2h/day. A completely free day is much more valuable than the snippets of free time I get after a work day, days I don't have much energy left to do what I actually want in my life.

[deckard1]

> People can also live closer to work

Not in America. We have a thing called "suburbs" here. That's where people live. For cost, quality of life, school, etc. reasons. Some cities don't even have a center, such as LA which is just sprawl in every direction as far as the eye can see. You may work in Santa Monica and your spouse works in DTLA. At least one of you is going to have an absolute hell of a commute. SV isn't better. Your place of work probably is the suburbs. Just not your suburbs.

> no one thinks college is better remote

Says who? My college experience: go sit in a giant auditorium with 60 other people and listen to a lecture with no actual interaction with the professor. I could have stayed home and watched a YouTube video with less distraction and more comfort. In college you are entirely on your own to learn the material. That's the best time to go remote. I can sit and rewind a video until I understand it. I can pause and take a break.

> happiness of a larger house

That's probably the last reason you buy a house in CA. But you don't have to make that trade-off today. Because remote is a thing.

Today I went and took a shit in my private bathroom. I didn't have some guy come in and sit down not even 2 feet away and start gassing me with his morning diarrhea. I also didn't go back to my open office hot desk under the harsh florescent lights and try to read my morning email with people walking and talking behind me wondering if these people are looking at my screen.

[FirmwareBurner]

>Not in America.

Not in Europe as well. You can't afford to uproot your family just because your new employer is on the other side of the city, and yet you're expected to if you want the job. A lot of my friends in Germany commute by car to work just because they don't liver within sensible cycling/public transport distance.

[kjkjadksj]

Some cities in europe are running with even worse systems than they had in wwii. Like heres a train station that eventually takes you to the capital city four times a day, and thats it. They ripped out the old tram networks already in many cities if they ever even had them at all. Some of the cities in south europe it seems like on foot is still the fastest way to get around, just as it was when the romans built the place, because of how much narrow one way gridlock the bus or other vehicles sit in.

[eddd-ddde]

I for sure believe college is better remote, during lectures I feel like a hostage: forced to hear stuff i don't care about or already know, forces to hear it four times so the people that didn't get can try again, forced to hear it yet again the next four days, forced to commute someplace so they can grade me based on my "presence", forced to waste focus and time working assignments I know aren't worth a thing in the real life.

</college-rant>

[ghaff]

While I don't wholly disagree, that sounds a lot like arranging your life around your work rather than the other way around. Not that I have a regular uurban office anyway (my "official" office if I went in is out in the suburbs), I'm not at all sure that would lead me to live in a city apartment/condo at this point even if I did.

[FirmwareBurner]

>There's a reason no one thinks college is better remote, for example.

You're still young and developing in your college years. By the time you're in the workforce at >21 years, you are already socialized and more fit to handle remote collaboration.

[TeMPOraL]

Fair warning: all those connections you've made are very easy to lose within first few years after entering the workforce, and it's very hard to make new ones once you're a working adult.