If you've had people fixing broken windows for 100 years then windows stop getting broken, it may be more efficient in the long term - but in the short term, you've got lots of glaziers going bankrupt.

I think it's not the broken windows fallacy when it increases many remote workers' savings rate. That's different from the parable of paying a glazier for the window instead of a tailor for a suit, but rather having less money circulating in the economy when 20 days a month, I don't burn $5 of gasoline, eat a $2 lunch instead of a $15 lunch, and wear sweat pants instead of office clothes.

That could be $3000 of spending reduction for me that isn't replaced with $3000 of other consumption, but rather a significant portion of it goes into savings/investments.