How would a company hire local anyway, by rejecting candidates who live to far away? What if they promise to move, but don't end up doing it?
> Work with cities to reduce congestion?
The only real working way to do that is to ask them to introduce a congestion charge, which I am all for.
But getting 50% off of your Navigo, which is a monthly pass allowing you unlimited use of Paris and greater Paris public transports. Which is about 75 euros. So when your are subsidised by your company with respect to public transport, you have unlimited access to all public transport in and around Paris for 38 euros. Which is nuts because the Parisian public transport network is crazy (metros, trams, buses, transiliens, RERs).
When I was working as a consultant at Alten, in theory my gas could have been reimbursed (based on distance travelled and car horsepower), but I never tried since I used public transport during all my time there.
There's also a push to apply it to bicycles, but it's not widely implemented so far.
But it doesn't apply to car commuting.
oh no, the poor poor companies ;((((((
I hear things are pretty bad in the bay area and other metropolises that have high rent and low wage. Something should be done but I'm not sure this is it.
Works really well where it was pioneered (in Singapore) and also seems to do an OK job in London.
I suspect the Brits ain't as ruthless in applying orthodox economics in general, so they don't solve their problems nearly as well including their congestion problems.
The congestion charges in Singapore and London weren't popular when they were introduced either. So not sure what rejection elsewhere tells us?
I commute a bit over an hour. Because I cannot afford to live close to my job and rent a place for me and child.
It would cost me triple my current rent.