Quote:
Originally Posted by someone123
I will present a counter argument.
My old roommate used to work on projects like software for launching satellites. He did this from our not so nice apartment in Vancouver. He billed more than what a lot of people in supposed big boy jobs make.
Bay Area companies are increasingly hiring remotely and frankly they are far more interesting than anything we have in significant measure in Canada. I wish it weren't so but it is. For a lot of people Toronto is not on the "ladder" of success.
I don't say this to try to put down Toronto or because I think it's a bad city. This is just how things are going. Increasingly the most talented people pick where they live.
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by someone123
My point is that this "financial and business centre of Canada" status means perhaps 60% of what it did back in 1981. And if things keep going it won't mean much at all in 2061. I'm sure there will still be some legacy businesses but they won't grow much or be very attractive places to work, and their management will look like the Canadian senate does today (maybe they're already like this).
This doesn't mean that Toronto will do badly. I think it will be larger and more successful than today. This could be one of the biggest impacts we see on urbanism. For a long time it hasn't really been clear why we have tons of office workers commuting into expensive downtown skyscraper districts, but there was a lot of resistance to remote work. It's complicated but we will see a bit of a rebalancing.
|
I question the relevance to urbanism. It's not like California is an urban paradise. And Silicon Valley in particular is among the worst. All that tech money. And they built some world class suburban crap.