3 ms·

> (i.e. average salary is probably close to $200K.) Two bedroom rents in the cities nearby Mozilla Corporation's HQ are about 4.5k a month. That's about 54k a

> (i.e. average salary is probably close to $200K.) Two bedroom rents in the cities nearby Mozilla Corporation's HQ are about 4.5k a month. That's about 54k a year just in rent. But you still need to feed yourself and family, pay taxes, send your kids to school, buy health insurance and save for retirement. In that context, 200k a person is frankly cheap; their competitors pay 2x that.

reaperducer 6y ago
That's about 54k a year just in rent. The means, according to the standards set by the federal government, the employee should make at least $162,000 in take-home pay. The fed (Department of Housing, maybe?) guideline is that you should pay no more than ⅓ of your salary in rent.
- jldugger 6y ago
  Yes, and take home pay is post-taxes. Which are not insubstantial, considering both state and federal (and potentially city). 200k is about on par for getting by, if not a bit below market rate.
- bscphil 6y ago
  > The fed (Department of Housing, maybe?) guideline is that you should pay no more than ⅓ of your salary in rent. That value is absolutely absurd. It seems clearly intended to apply to those making under 100k a year in rent. Take the extreme case. If the highest paid employee of Mozilla makes $3M a year, does that mean their rent should cost "less than" $1M a year? What does that even mean? Money has a decreasing marginal utility for individuals. When you talk about 54k a year in rent on a $162k salary, that's over $100k left over after you pay for rent. In other words, more than twice what I and my partner made together last year, before we had to pay rent. And we have the same expenses as anyone making that $100k after the rent is paid. Food, utilities, childcare, and so on. One person having over a hundred thousand dollars to spend after rent has quite a lot of money and should become relatively wealthy relatively quickly. The 1/3 figure just serves to hide this basic fact.
dependenttypes 6y ago
Time to move the HQ then.
20after4 6y ago
There are places where you can get a decent house for about $50k, total. Why the hell people remain in an area with that kind of rent is beyond comprehension. Nothing about the bay area is worth that.
- clintonb 6y ago
  Where are these places? How does the (pre-pandemic) quality of life compare to that of a metropolitan area? At one point I joked that I could buy an entire block of houses in Detroit. It doesn't matter if there is nothing for me to do there, no schools for my family, or preferred entertainment options/venues.

reaperducer 6y ago

That's about 54k a year just in rent. The means, according to the standards set by the federal government, the employee should make at least $162,000 in take-home pay. The fed (Department of Housing, maybe?) guideline is that you should pay no more than ⅓ of your salary in rent.

jldugger 6y ago
Yes, and take home pay is post-taxes. Which are not insubstantial, considering both state and federal (and potentially city). 200k is about on par for getting by, if not a bit below market rate.
bscphil 6y ago
> The fed (Department of Housing, maybe?) guideline is that you should pay no more than ⅓ of your salary in rent. That value is absolutely absurd. It seems clearly intended to apply to those making under 100k a year in rent. Take the extreme case. If the highest paid employee of Mozilla makes $3M a year, does that mean their rent should cost "less than" $1M a year? What does that even mean? Money has a decreasing marginal utility for individuals. When you talk about 54k a year in rent on a $162k salary, that's over $100k left over after you pay for rent. In other words, more than twice what I and my partner made together last year, before we had to pay rent. And we have the same expenses as anyone making that $100k after the rent is paid. Food, utilities, childcare, and so on. One person having over a hundred thousand dollars to spend after rent has quite a lot of money and should become relatively wealthy relatively quickly. The 1/3 figure just serves to hide this basic fact.

dependenttypes 6y ago

Time to move the HQ then.

20after4 6y ago

There are places where you can get a decent house for about $50k, total. Why the hell people remain in an area with that kind of rent is beyond comprehension. Nothing about the bay area is worth that.

clintonb 6y ago
Where are these places? How does the (pre-pandemic) quality of life compare to that of a metropolitan area? At one point I joked that I could buy an entire block of houses in Detroit. It doesn't matter if there is nothing for me to do there, no schools for my family, or preferred entertainment options/venues.