I know the benefits for being in the bay are substantial, but this problem is entirely brought about by tech companies, not the resident. Employers need to setup shop in less populated places and grow there.
You shouldn't pretend that there aren't negative side-effects from the collection of success and wealth in Seattle, Portland and the Bay Area.
Decentralizing the workforce would help decentralize the problem.
I find that mentality vehemently disgusting. The government is expensive and wasteful, acts in bad faith, disrespects our rights, and steals from us every day. Why people idolize that, I have no idea.
Of course there are bad side effects, but only because we've collectively decided to not solve the housing problem. It's not some obscure issue, we know how to fix it. We just choose not to.
> Decentralizing the workforce would help decentralize the problem.
If it was that simple, they'd have already done it because it would save them money.
Organizationally, there are advantages to physical colocation that you're just ignoring here. It's the triumph of the city.
We can look at successful models like Tokyo or Vienna, but instead of doing that people just throw up their arms and go, "what could possibly be done??" as if this was some novel, inscrutable problem.
There's a reason why companies have large offices in the Bay Area and are willing to pay the exorbitant salaries and rent there.
If they could reasonably relocate to middle America where land and salaries are cheap, they would - they all know how expensive it is to operate in the bay area, yet they choose to do so.