Quote:
Originally Posted by CorsiHockeyLeague
It's not the solution in the housing area, no. But the housing issue doesn't somehow undermine all the other benefits it provides, as suggested by people who are predisposed to dismiss it saying things like "well everyone everywhere will just raise rent by $1000". The response is threefold. First, based on the pilot programs that have been implemented, the problem isn't anywhere near as bad as you think it is. Second, the additional economic and geographic freedom you get when your basic subsistence isn't tied to your job allows for more mobility which itself is a downward pressure on housing prices. Third, there are other solutions that can and should be implemented (including rent controls) to further offset any housing cost increases that do ultimately occur.
But to simplistically exaggerate a challenge faced by a policy proposal, and when the response is "yeah, that's an issue, but we can ameliorate it in the following ways", to dismiss the whole idea for lack of a silver bullet solution, and then say that it's therefore totally fine if a major media outlet effectively blacklists the candidate proposing it, suggests to me that one is being... less than intellectually honest.
|
And to the point regarding economic freedom (and I know you likely include this your definition of that), it gives workers more bargaining power to request working conditions that are more beneficial to them, one being the ability to work remotely and thus having greater housing options.