That's not helpful for the majority of people that actually like where they live. I live in the middle of a city because I like living in the middle of a city, for reasons that have nothing to do with where I work. Most people are not harboring a secret desire to suddenly move to a completely different type of neighborhood for the cheap land if they no longer have to commute.

Being forced to purchase a larger living space because a company decides to go remote is transferring a business cost to the employee. The same goes for being forced to move to a different neighborhood with land that is "plentiful and cheap" because you can't afford to buy a bigger place in your current neighborhood.

You make some good points.

I don't know that your desire matches with the majority of people living in a big city. I mean, I'm sure there are lots of people who do like living there, but there are also lots of people who have moved from elsewhere to big cities specifically for job opportunities. Being in a big city has its advantages (jobs, access to more specialized businesses and ammenities) but also its costs (crime, lack of natural beauty, etc.).

I think you may find that, after everyone who wanted to leave the city can, the costs for those who want to remain might settle down.

I’m not saying you’re wrong, but you first need to establish that there is, in fact, a large group of people living in cities because they “have to” for work. I don’t think this can be treated as a fact without some evidence. The power of cities isn’t some US-only phenomenon, it has been the dominant economic engine for centuries.