I have only basic qualifications.

Do you pay better than delivery?

It's this much hourly, plus performance-based bonuses that external firms currently predict will amount to this much for you specifically. Room is included.

No qualifications beyond basic are needed, it's manual labour. We'll cover your train ticket either overnight tonight or in two days, preferably tonight, conditional on you working at least this many hours or else partially on a pro-rata basis.

We expect to want to keep you for five days, possibly more of you're really great.

What do you need me to do exactly?

And why so short notice?

Yes- Ohhhh.

Wait, why right now? That's still two days away.

There's a lot of work we need to do to prepare, and recovery is faster if we already have enough workers on site.

Every hour the city is closed costs us thiiiiisssss much money.

You're all a bunch of boring people, who only make boring choices at every opportunity. Even when you've got a wacky political theory to guide you, you still play it straight.

You all suck.

If you let people do all the crazy nonsense that they really want to do, on average it'll pan out and everyone will be better off.

No you don't. You have Economic Libertarianism already.

They try to write local laws to not get in the way of the economy, so that everyone can get rich together. They're still willing to limit freedom in the name of property rights, and impose liability rules that in practice limit innovation because you have to pay all of the liability but get only a market-negotiated fraction of potential upsides.

We're Cultural Libertarianism. We want laws that lead to a culture of people being able to do cool stuff, even if those laws require local government investment, a less than perfectly free economy, or less than totally trustworthy property rights.

One of us wants a penthouse apartment only accessible by a twelve story external rock-climbing wall. Another wants to put a rollercoaster between several high-rise buildings.

Both those things aren't efficiently facilitated by any existing cities, and we have the money, therefore you have to let us have our own city.

That sounds like firstly a huge safety risk, secondly a bit cruel to disabled people, and by disabled people we mean people who can't scale a twelve story rock-climbing wall in a reasonable amount of time and effort, and thirdly rather expensive.

Are you totally sure you're not about to bankrupt yourself and everyone dumb enough to invest in you?

Fine, you can have your own city if you want, if you can cover the land taxes.

The design difficulties are all your problem.

Great!

We want this bit of land here, in the tropics.
So that people nearer the poles can have somewhere sunny to visit.
The beaches look pretty sweet.

Sounds cool!

Do we get a discount for that?

Not after you factor in the cost of insurance. You're going to have to build tough, and even then you'll probably have to fix weather damage every few years.

It'll be expensive. Here's how expensive we think it'll be.

Worst case scenario, people will just not be around during bad weather.

Good thing there's a Weather Commission to warn them.

What do you mean not be around? Are you planning a deal with another city to provide temporary housing for disaster refugees?

And we'd really like to know how you plan to pay for all this.
Cities need exports.
Otherwise we're all diligently paying for our share of things like the Weather Commission and you'd just get to have it for free.