Is it awesome? It raises the cost of everything everywhere else (because for the majority of young, educated people there aren't _that_ many desirable cities). We are already seeing that in places like Austin or Colorado.
"Desirable cities" for me, as a 30-year-old software engineer, include Brevard, North Carolina and Dahlonega, Georgia. Notably, that list does not include New York City, Los Angeles, and definitely doesn't include San Francisco (I'd quit a job if it required me to move there, without a second thought).
"Desirable" is a multivariate subjective assessment, not an objective trait (or even a mostly-consensus one).
One of the best DBAs I've had the pleasure of working with would, from what I've gathered, prefer to be in a boat on a lake somewhere in rural Alabama than to be in many of the major "tech hub cities". Being a software engineer doesn't mean you have the same opinions as other software engineers (as a quick search of programming language trends might show, at least on a superficial level).
There aren't enough people employed in tech for their escape from SF to raise cost of living meaningfully across the globe. There are enough places to live in (with no shortage of real estate), so bring it on.
And I think there'll be more desirable cities to live in in the future if remote work becomes the norm across fields where it is possible. People will start to liven up locations that nobody would otherwise look at as long as the jobs aren't there.
And, yes, maybe there are not enough software developers in SF, NYC, Austin, and other tech hubs to drive up prices, but this move will certainly drive down compensation. I have a hard time believing such a move would end up being good for workers.
