3 ms·

> No I don't. I have a wife and 2 children who if I can afford to give them their own room, I will. Fair enough, I didn't mean you specifically. Once you have

• kasey_junk 10y ago
  > Of course, the advantage of working in SF/NYC is that by the time I'm ready to have kids I'll have enough money saved up to buy a house in a low-cost area in cash. That doesn't follow from the argument. If the COL adjustment means that the salary differential is not enough to cover the difference, you will be able to save more in the low cost location as well. Of course all of those arguments are reductive as COL is not that easy to calculate and there may be other financial advantages to being local to the higher cost area (more diversity of work, less risk at job loss, or higher chance for a lottery style payout for instance).
  • morgante 10y ago
    > If the COL adjustment means that the salary differential is not enough to cover the difference, you will be able to save more in the low cost location as well. That's assuming you are spending all of your income. If you're saving money in KC (on $80k/yr) you should also be able save twice as much on $150k/yr—even if you assume a linear cost multiplier for all your expenses.