> If every single office job went remote, what's the point of a city like New York. Who's going to willingly pay $6,000 for an apartment, ride the trains for over an hour a day, if you can just sit at home in a much cheaper city .

Yeah, but that's the heart of the problem here. The suburbs that many flocked to when WFH became acceptable are largely subsidized by city income. Cities are largely funded by employers paying hefty taxes to operate within them. Non-negligible portions of municipal budgets are also funded by small businesses that cannot exist without people working centrally somewhere.

Until municipal governments figure out a different operating model, I don't think any major city can survive big companies pulling out en masse unless your desired end state looks like Detroit circa 2000.

> I go to work in exchange for currency, which is required to acquire goods and services. All this other crap, all these holiday parties, all of this let's dance in diversity videos, no that's not what I'm here for .

What of the people whose jobs aren't WFH compatible? "They get what they get?"