The unspoken advantage of remote teams is that employers can use the location pay disparity to their advantage. For example, we had pressure from executives to do more hiring in our international offices because employees were cheaper.
Abandoning location-based pay sounds good to people who feel they are disadvantaged due to location, but location-based modifiers suddenly become popular again when companies start moving compensation toward their cheapest location instead of toward their most expensive location.
The other advantage of hiring in cheap locations is that it's equally cheaper to provide large incentives to the best performers in those locations.
I could pay $150,000 for an average engineer at some of our US offices, and that employee would still be shopping around for their next 10% raise at a competing company.
Or I could pay $100,000 USD equivalent for a great engineer at some of our international offices, and that employee would be so far above market rate that they'd be doing their best work every day because they were so thankful for the opportunity.
I suspect HN's opinion on location-based pay might change over time as Americans realize that US salaries are the outlier on an international scale, regardless of which state or city you live in.