4 ms·

Please be aware that moving to the bay area for any reason other than fun will be a serious life mistake. If you move to the bay area in your 20s, by the time

Please be aware that moving to the bay area for any reason other than fun will be a serious life mistake. If you move to the bay area in your 20s, by the time you're in your 40s you will have a specific knowledge of a fad language that is 20 years old. But even if you somehow keep up with new tech in your spare time, you will look 40 something and thus be nearly unemployable solely on those grounds. And you simply will be unable to save any reasonable amount of money no mater how many beers you don't drink. Like anyone else in the states, your sole savings would be home equity which you won't have because you won't be able to buy any kind of home in the few years your age makes you employable. If in doubt, for those still in SF, determine the savings of your co workers in their 20s and 30s (who are now near then end of their employability), and whether they rent or own (good luck finding a 50 something coworker to ask). Be aware that you do not leave the bay area rich, you leave it because you can't afford it. And be aware there are few middle aged and effectively no old people there. And beware that 45 is only half way to retirement age.

niuzeta 11y ago
I'm in Canada and every time I consider prospects of getting into United States, comments like this frighten me. More specifically the Valley area for its renowned reputation of tech-oriented culture, and make good earnings. Compared to what I see in, say, Toronto area with bad housing and a bunch of old .NET 2.0 I feel that it must be better there. What I find lacking in such comments, though, is some explanation on why and the suggested alternatives. Would you mind sharing why? Java/C# were the hot things of 10-15 years ago and people still make a living out of it. It sounds like an argument for classic Red Queen problem where the only winning move is not to play.
- api 11y ago
  There's a happy medium somewhere between the wasteland of legacy "enterprise" jobs (.NET 2.0 and such) and the nutzo SF/SV orbit. I live in Southern California (LA/OC). It's not cheap by any measure but it's within the bounds of economic sanity compared to SF/SV. There are tons of very interesting tech jobs in cutting edge areas like computer vision, AI/ML, the latest web and DevOps tech, and a lot of hardware/EE stuff. There are many other places like this. Canada probably has a few too. Even NYC, which is more expensive than LA, is still "sane" compared to SF when you consider what you get. In NYC car ownership is very optional, which mitigates the high rents, while in SF you must own a car if you ever want to leave the peninsula. I've turned down numerous offers in SF/SV because it just seems economically insane. The housing prices are clearly unsustainable and the OP's comment about it being a "serious life mistake" rings true. The craziness has also priced out much of the interesting culture that made SF compelling in the first place. Edit: I keep hearing about the relentless ageism in SF/SV tech. I don't see so much of it elsewhere. Is it really that bad? If so it seems like a SF/SV thing and not necessarily true everywhere. In that case it might make some sense for young people to spend some time in SF/SV getting into the latest stuff and learning and then bail before 30.
- whybroke 11y ago
  I of course don't know the why. I lived in the bay area coding for 10 years and left 5 years ago when the current state of affairs was just starting. Upon every visit back upon seeing the falling quality of life, especially for housing, I'm thankful I'm out. But I too would dearly like someone to show me that I am wrong. To disprove my observation that the vast bulk of people who move to the bay area do not stay there happily and prosperously the rest of their lives but eventually move out, maybe with a wistful blog post.
tizzdogg 11y ago
"There are few middle-aged and effectively no old people there". Well that's just total bullshit. There are tons of middle aged and elderly people in SF, most of whom moved to the city in the 60s or 70s and bought property before it became ridiculously expensive. There is a huge population of aging hippies still in SF. Now if you mean "there are few middle aged people working in the startup world", you might be correct, but I'd guess that's the same for startups anywhere. Not everything in San Francisco is the tech world, and the city does not just consist of the Mission and SOMA. Most of the city is non-tech families and less exciting residential neighborhoods. People who dont live in SF usually dont see that side of it.

niuzeta 11y ago

I'm in Canada and every time I consider prospects of getting into United States, comments like this frighten me. More specifically the Valley area for its renowned reputation of tech-oriented culture, and make good earnings. Compared to what I see in, say, Toronto area with bad housing and a bunch of old .NET 2.0 I feel that it must be better there. What I find lacking in such comments, though, is some explanation on why and the suggested alternatives. Would you mind sharing why? Java/C# were the hot things of 10-15 years ago and people still make a living out of it. It sounds like an argument for classic Red Queen problem where the only winning move is not to play.

api 11y ago
There's a happy medium somewhere between the wasteland of legacy "enterprise" jobs (.NET 2.0 and such) and the nutzo SF/SV orbit. I live in Southern California (LA/OC). It's not cheap by any measure but it's within the bounds of economic sanity compared to SF/SV. There are tons of very interesting tech jobs in cutting edge areas like computer vision, AI/ML, the latest web and DevOps tech, and a lot of hardware/EE stuff. There are many other places like this. Canada probably has a few too. Even NYC, which is more expensive than LA, is still "sane" compared to SF when you consider what you get. In NYC car ownership is very optional, which mitigates the high rents, while in SF you must own a car if you ever want to leave the peninsula. I've turned down numerous offers in SF/SV because it just seems economically insane. The housing prices are clearly unsustainable and the OP's comment about it being a "serious life mistake" rings true. The craziness has also priced out much of the interesting culture that made SF compelling in the first place. Edit: I keep hearing about the relentless ageism in SF/SV tech. I don't see so much of it elsewhere. Is it really that bad? If so it seems like a SF/SV thing and not necessarily true everywhere. In that case it might make some sense for young people to spend some time in SF/SV getting into the latest stuff and learning and then bail before 30.
whybroke 11y ago
I of course don't know the why. I lived in the bay area coding for 10 years and left 5 years ago when the current state of affairs was just starting. Upon every visit back upon seeing the falling quality of life, especially for housing, I'm thankful I'm out. But I too would dearly like someone to show me that I am wrong. To disprove my observation that the vast bulk of people who move to the bay area do not stay there happily and prosperously the rest of their lives but eventually move out, maybe with a wistful blog post.

tizzdogg 11y ago

"There are few middle-aged and effectively no old people there". Well that's just total bullshit. There are tons of middle aged and elderly people in SF, most of whom moved to the city in the 60s or 70s and bought property before it became ridiculously expensive. There is a huge population of aging hippies still in SF. Now if you mean "there are few middle aged people working in the startup world", you might be correct, but I'd guess that's the same for startups anywhere. Not everything in San Francisco is the tech world, and the city does not just consist of the Mission and SOMA. Most of the city is non-tech families and less exciting residential neighborhoods. People who dont live in SF usually dont see that side of it.