Mоre imаges per secоnd imprоve temporаl resolution.
The key pоint here is thаt if lаbоr mаrkets are cоmpetitive, then firms will have to pay for office space and equipment either way, either directly (work at the office-office) or through a higher wage to compensate workers for their expenses. [This relates to both compensating differentials and make-or-fallacies in the context of vertical integration] In the baseline comparison, then, this is a wash. [Not: firms can dump these costs on the workers.] The second step is to consider for whom the costs would be lower, and obviously that depends on the details of the situation. [Scoring depended not on the final answer but on how much thought went into the details of the comparison] Some examples: Rents are higher in city centers than in suburbs or other remote locations Firms may benefit from economies of scale in both the provision of office space and of equipment (computers etc.) Some argued that many workers don't need extra space or equipment at home, but many do. The pandemic revealed that many workers were not set up (e.g., in terms of space to have a Zoom meeting) to perform a full-time job at home Some pointed out that workers would take better care of equipment that they own. [Differences in sunk, fixed or variable costs should not play a role except in the very short term. As in, "Ofiices already have equipment but workers would have to buy new stuff"]