alt Hacker NewsYou just can't live in the Bay anymore, that's all there is to it. It'd be great if you could. But anything within a 2 hour commute requires a minimum of $200k salary to survive, let alone get ahead. Unless you're inheriting your parents house or piling into a roommate situation, it's just completely undoable over the long term. Compare this to NYC which has innumerable options when it comes to suburbs, with better transit, lower taxes, reasonably priced homes, and far greater apartment options. I don't see how SF ends up as anything but a place for raising capital in the future. The (true) middle class tech worker dream is dead and gone there.
Replies
This, 100%. Seattle is ranked #2 but the cost is ballooning and the environment is very much east coast vs west coast USA.
It used to be better, remote I feel is better in Seattle but the hidden costs of being in the Seattle region involve possible commute, car purchase and the general RTA, fragmented neighborhoods, public transit is improving but nothing near what is nyc. Housing… I feel is cheaper in nyc, food across the board is much more inexpensive in much. Hotels are varied and more inexpensive in nyc.
One thing I have enjoyed is time zone differences. 3 hours difference is a lot and if you can balance that you can have a wonderful Seattle afternoon.
Problem is winter sucks in PNW.
I was nodding along until the NYC part. Up until ~6 months ago, NYC was more expensive than SF.
A 200k salary is what... 13k net? You're telling me that income is just surviving in the Bay Area?
SF is my favorite city in the world, but as a tech worker in a flyover state I've given up on it being anything but a nice place to visit. I couldn't afford it alone, let alone with my family.
>You need a 200k salary to live without roommates within 2 hours of downtown SF
That's a bit of an exaggeration. You could rent a 1/2br in SF proper with that salary. You could easily live within 40 minutes of SF in East Bay/Daly City comfortably at 120k.