My gut response to sentiments like these is to roll my eyes at what feels like stoking fear and uncertainty about remote work and preserving the status quo. (Not from the reporter, @jonchesto's AOK with me.) https://www.bostonglobe.com/2020/11/12/business/mass-is-again-ranked-top-tech-innovation-challenges-loom/

Does a future of remote work pose a problem to Massachusetts and other high-cost states? Yes, it threatens to reduce landlords' ability to rent seek and throttle housing markets into hyper-inflated wastelands. (Where are my pearls?)

Plenty of people want to be in cities and would love to stay, especially with reduced commute times because roads and public transportation aren't overwhelmed. I thought a city with a better quality of life is what innovation needs?

Does a future of remote work present an opportunity for Massachusetts and other high-cost states? Yes, workers end better off due to lower costs of living outside metro areas. Other cities and towns get a chance to add to their tax bases while state taxes are stable.

Innovation can happen anywhere, and collaboration tools are getting better and better. (We still have so far to go on ACCESSIBLE collaboration tools, but that's another thread.)

States and employers need to figure this out. It can't be one side dictating to the other. A think tank giving remote work the stink-eye and calling a better quality of life somewhere else as "a real threat" to a city reads like dark satire.

Distributed companies and remote work aren't a cure-all. There are drawbacks (social isolation, team dynamics, managing styles), but they're worth exploring while the need is critical. We don't understand the long-tail effects of remote work yet.

It surprises me a group appreciating innovation would lean towards the status quo. The opportunities for innovation in remote work, services, and tools are staggering.

Maybe that'll be in the next report.

… anyway, here’s W̶o̶n̶d̶e̶r̶ Wall of Voodoo.