8 ms·

"Forgetting cost-of-living adjustments for a moment, our data indicates that there are advantages to starting your career in San Francisco" If you are relocati

"Forgetting cost-of-living adjustments for a moment, our data indicates that there are advantages to starting your career in San Francisco" If you are relocating to the bay area with a family (say on a visa that doesn't allow your spouse to work) and your offer is 130K$, no matter (almost) where you live, stay there!

ryandrake 11y ago
Why? $130K is a respectable salary, nearly twice the median for the area. Sure, you couldn't live in a luxury home in the city, but with $130K you could live in the outskirts of the Bay Area and commute in. Totally do-able.
- ljk 11y ago
  > outskirts of the Bay Area and commute in. Totally do-able. I'd imagine people with family wouldn't want to spend a lot of time away from families to commute
  - gleenn 11y ago
    They might not want to but many definitely do
- avitzurel 11y ago
  Depends on what you mean by "outskirts of the Bay Area" and what is the school district. Say you have 2 kids under 5, you have to pay around 1200-1500$ for education for each of them, 3200-3800$ is rent. Doable? Not really [edit] Even if your kids are not in school yet, good school district means better neighborhoods (for most parts).
  - ryandrake 11y ago
    I live about 50 miles from work (~2 hour commute each way) and my monthly housing cost is around $2000. It's totally do-able. 2 hours is a little on the high end for a commute, but it's not the end of the world.
    - mox1 11y ago
      4 hours a day driving is not "a little on the high end", you are 4x the average american (~50 minutes round trip). Spending 4 hours to work 8 hours is crazy.... It amazes me anyone does this and has a normal life.
      - pc86 11y ago
        The longest commute I ever had was open highway, about 40 miles in each direction. Rush hour was not an issue as I was just going between two small towns. It was awful. Sure, I got to listen to ~90 minutes of podcasts or Audible each day, but even still that's not productive time. All it took was one accident on the highway and my day just went from 9.5 hours to 12. Needless to say, my next job (and current) is about 4 miles away from my house and my quality of life has gone up exponentially, even though when I was doing it I did not mind the commute much. You could double my salary and I don't think I would even consider a 2 hour one-way commute.
    - Jtsummers 11y ago
      Is your commute driving yourself or public transport? Carpooling? If it's driving yourself, that's 4 hours a day, 5 days a week. 20 hours a week, say 48 work weeks a year (assuming vacation and holidays give you 4 weeks off), that's 960 hours, or 40 days of driving each year. Just to and from work. I agree that it's not the end of the world, but I resolved long ago to never have a commute like that (I came close at 1.5 hours each way for a month before I moved closer to work). That's a lot of time not being spent with family (if you have one) or that could be spent on other goals (personal, professional, educational).
    - algorithmmonkey 11y ago
      So, get in your car at 7 am to get to work by 9 for your daily stand up. You then work your 9 - 10 hrs., because it's a good day and no major deadline looming. Then you get in your car at 6 pm (you skipped lunch or ate on the run) for your 2 hr drive. Instead of going home you go to the gym for a much needed workout, but sadly when you leave it's now 9:30 pm. Hopefully, you'll be able to grab some fast food b/c you have no time for a real meal. Finally, you get home at roughly 10:15. You are just in time to catch a show, set the alarm, climb into bed and get some zzz's before starting the grind tomorrow. And that glimpse is without a family...
  - josephjrobison 11y ago
    Isn't the Richmond or Outer Richmond area fairly affordable?
    - simoncion 11y ago
      The number I see bandied about for one-bedrooms in Richmond/Outer Richmond is between $2,400 to $2,600/month. [0] Given that you're goddamn not raising a family in a one bedroom [1], I'd say avitzurel's rent estimation sounds fairly reasonable, and definitely below average for the entire city. [2] [0] http://priceonomics.com/the-san-francisco-rent-explosion-part-iii/ http://priceonomics.com/the-san-francisco-rent-explosion-par... [1] Especially many of the tiny places that pass for "one bedroom" apartments in the city these days. [2] Of course, the trick is finding an apartment to house your clan.
    - avitzurel 11y ago
      In general, the easy bay is cheaper than the south bay (MV, SJ, etc..). However, because Facebook is now a bridge away from the easy bay it drove prices up like crazy. For a 2 bedroom in a good school district, I doubt you can find anything under 3200, this will be a steal.
- ones_and_zeros 11y ago
  Because Software Developers are constantly told they are well paid, and their skills are in incredible demand. If that were true then they'd be able to live comfortably where ever they really want to and not be pushed to the "outskirts" of an economic zone and deal with an awful commute on top of that. I think if anything, and this data supports it, developers are underpaid and that's because they are easy to push around, IMO.
  - sokoloff 11y ago
    What if a lot of the nearby desirable land was bordered by water on all sides where it wasn't bordered by mountains and lots of other developers, some more senior or working for larger, more profitable companies, were also bidding on that same limited resource?
- dalanmiller 11y ago
  > Totally do-able If I want to live in my car for four hours a day sitting in traffic. Some of the bigger companies have shuttles and such but it doesn't fix the problem that all highways in the Bay Area during rush hours are parking lots.
  - Aqua_Geek 11y ago
    If your company is in SF, BART will get you pretty far in an hour.
- dionidium 11y ago
  OK, do-able. But your other option is to make 70% of that in a city where housing costs 1/4 as much.
  - thescriptkiddie 11y ago
    Where you live is a lifestyle choice. If you find a place that's 1/4 as expensive as SF, is it going to be 1/4 as nice to live there? Considering that rent in SF is only around double what you pay in most other american cities, the 1/4 figure implies you'd be living somewhere undesirable. Is that a worthwhile trade-off?
    - dionidium 11y ago
      We could easily get into picking nits, which I don't want to do, but I'll clarify that the difference is much more notable on the ownership side. You can get a very desirable house for $300k in the midwest that would simply be way out of your price range in SF. Unattainable. The ownership comparison looks more like this: 1) in the midwest you can buy a large home; 2) in San Francisco you don't buy at all.
      - thescriptkiddie 11y ago
        Sure, you can get a big house cheap in the midwest. But then you have to live in the midwest. Is that what you really want? Living in cities, especially SF, is expensive because people want to live there. A high standard of living in the suburbs might not make you as happy as a lower one in the ciy. And while maintaining a high standard of living in SF is extremely expensive, maintaining a comfortable lifestyle on an engineer's salary is still perfectly doable. People tend to make lots of money and spend it all on things that don't really make them happy. If you want to live in San Francisco or New York or London, then just go do it.
        dionidium 11y ago
        I agree with most of what you've just said, except that it's not like the entire Midwest is suburbs. St. Louis and Cincinnati and Indianapolis and so on all have their hip, walkable, urban areas. No, they're not as cool as The Mission. But they've got all the same stuff that The Mission does, just on a smaller scale. How much are you willing to pay for the extra coolness? If you want to live in San Francisco or New York or London, then just go do it. Couldn't agree with this more. If you want San Francisco, then you're not going to find anything like it in the Midwest. But don't be fooled into thinking your other option is a farm.
- simoncion 11y ago
  > Why? $130K is a respectable salary, nearly twice the median for the area. ...I know that a web developer with one year of on-the-job experience and no formal training pulls down right around $100k in SF. $130k may be twice the median for the area, but it seems like the pay bump for mid-to-senior level people should be substantially more than 30%, no?

ryandrake 11y ago

Why? $130K is a respectable salary, nearly twice the median for the area. Sure, you couldn't live in a luxury home in the city, but with $130K you could live in the outskirts of the Bay Area and commute in. Totally do-able.

ljk 11y ago
> outskirts of the Bay Area and commute in. Totally do-able. I'd imagine people with family wouldn't want to spend a lot of time away from families to commute
- gleenn 11y ago
  They might not want to but many definitely do
avitzurel 11y ago
Depends on what you mean by "outskirts of the Bay Area" and what is the school district. Say you have 2 kids under 5, you have to pay around 1200-1500$ for education for each of them, 3200-3800$ is rent. Doable? Not really [edit] Even if your kids are not in school yet, good school district means better neighborhoods (for most parts).
- ryandrake 11y ago
  I live about 50 miles from work (~2 hour commute each way) and my monthly housing cost is around $2000. It's totally do-able. 2 hours is a little on the high end for a commute, but it's not the end of the world.
  - mox1 11y ago
    4 hours a day driving is not "a little on the high end", you are 4x the average american (~50 minutes round trip). Spending 4 hours to work 8 hours is crazy.... It amazes me anyone does this and has a normal life.
    - pc86 11y ago
      The longest commute I ever had was open highway, about 40 miles in each direction. Rush hour was not an issue as I was just going between two small towns. It was awful. Sure, I got to listen to ~90 minutes of podcasts or Audible each day, but even still that's not productive time. All it took was one accident on the highway and my day just went from 9.5 hours to 12. Needless to say, my next job (and current) is about 4 miles away from my house and my quality of life has gone up exponentially, even though when I was doing it I did not mind the commute much. You could double my salary and I don't think I would even consider a 2 hour one-way commute.
  - Jtsummers 11y ago
    Is your commute driving yourself or public transport? Carpooling? If it's driving yourself, that's 4 hours a day, 5 days a week. 20 hours a week, say 48 work weeks a year (assuming vacation and holidays give you 4 weeks off), that's 960 hours, or 40 days of driving each year. Just to and from work. I agree that it's not the end of the world, but I resolved long ago to never have a commute like that (I came close at 1.5 hours each way for a month before I moved closer to work). That's a lot of time not being spent with family (if you have one) or that could be spent on other goals (personal, professional, educational).
  - algorithmmonkey 11y ago
    So, get in your car at 7 am to get to work by 9 for your daily stand up. You then work your 9 - 10 hrs., because it's a good day and no major deadline looming. Then you get in your car at 6 pm (you skipped lunch or ate on the run) for your 2 hr drive. Instead of going home you go to the gym for a much needed workout, but sadly when you leave it's now 9:30 pm. Hopefully, you'll be able to grab some fast food b/c you have no time for a real meal. Finally, you get home at roughly 10:15. You are just in time to catch a show, set the alarm, climb into bed and get some zzz's before starting the grind tomorrow. And that glimpse is without a family...
- josephjrobison 11y ago
  Isn't the Richmond or Outer Richmond area fairly affordable?
  - simoncion 11y ago
    The number I see bandied about for one-bedrooms in Richmond/Outer Richmond is between $2,400 to $2,600/month. [0] Given that you're goddamn not raising a family in a one bedroom [1], I'd say avitzurel's rent estimation sounds fairly reasonable, and definitely below average for the entire city. [2] [0] http://priceonomics.com/the-san-francisco-rent-explosion-part-iii/ http://priceonomics.com/the-san-francisco-rent-explosion-par... [1] Especially many of the tiny places that pass for "one bedroom" apartments in the city these days. [2] Of course, the trick is finding an apartment to house your clan.
  - avitzurel 11y ago
    In general, the easy bay is cheaper than the south bay (MV, SJ, etc..). However, because Facebook is now a bridge away from the easy bay it drove prices up like crazy. For a 2 bedroom in a good school district, I doubt you can find anything under 3200, this will be a steal.
ones_and_zeros 11y ago
Because Software Developers are constantly told they are well paid, and their skills are in incredible demand. If that were true then they'd be able to live comfortably where ever they really want to and not be pushed to the "outskirts" of an economic zone and deal with an awful commute on top of that. I think if anything, and this data supports it, developers are underpaid and that's because they are easy to push around, IMO.
- sokoloff 11y ago
  What if a lot of the nearby desirable land was bordered by water on all sides where it wasn't bordered by mountains and lots of other developers, some more senior or working for larger, more profitable companies, were also bidding on that same limited resource?
dalanmiller 11y ago
> Totally do-able If I want to live in my car for four hours a day sitting in traffic. Some of the bigger companies have shuttles and such but it doesn't fix the problem that all highways in the Bay Area during rush hours are parking lots.
- Aqua_Geek 11y ago
  If your company is in SF, BART will get you pretty far in an hour.
dionidium 11y ago
OK, do-able. But your other option is to make 70% of that in a city where housing costs 1/4 as much.
- thescriptkiddie 11y ago
  Where you live is a lifestyle choice. If you find a place that's 1/4 as expensive as SF, is it going to be 1/4 as nice to live there? Considering that rent in SF is only around double what you pay in most other american cities, the 1/4 figure implies you'd be living somewhere undesirable. Is that a worthwhile trade-off?
  - dionidium 11y ago
    We could easily get into picking nits, which I don't want to do, but I'll clarify that the difference is much more notable on the ownership side. You can get a very desirable house for $300k in the midwest that would simply be way out of your price range in SF. Unattainable. The ownership comparison looks more like this: 1) in the midwest you can buy a large home; 2) in San Francisco you don't buy at all.
    - thescriptkiddie 11y ago
      Sure, you can get a big house cheap in the midwest. But then you have to live in the midwest. Is that what you really want? Living in cities, especially SF, is expensive because people want to live there. A high standard of living in the suburbs might not make you as happy as a lower one in the ciy. And while maintaining a high standard of living in SF is extremely expensive, maintaining a comfortable lifestyle on an engineer's salary is still perfectly doable. People tend to make lots of money and spend it all on things that don't really make them happy. If you want to live in San Francisco or New York or London, then just go do it.
      - dionidium 11y ago
        I agree with most of what you've just said, except that it's not like the entire Midwest is suburbs. St. Louis and Cincinnati and Indianapolis and so on all have their hip, walkable, urban areas. No, they're not as cool as The Mission. But they've got all the same stuff that The Mission does, just on a smaller scale. How much are you willing to pay for the extra coolness? If you want to live in San Francisco or New York or London, then just go do it. Couldn't agree with this more. If you want San Francisco, then you're not going to find anything like it in the Midwest. But don't be fooled into thinking your other option is a farm.
simoncion 11y ago
> Why? $130K is a respectable salary, nearly twice the median for the area. ...I know that a web developer with one year of on-the-job experience and no formal training pulls down right around $100k in SF. $130k may be twice the median for the area, but it seems like the pay bump for mid-to-senior level people should be substantially more than 30%, no?