5 ms·
Great, if only there were adequate jobs in those places, so we could all own homes without needing $300K annual family income. The dissonance comes from the fa
by petsfed 4y ago
Great, if only there were adequate jobs in those places, so we could all own homes without needing $300K annual family income.
The dissonance comes from the fact that a lot of hackernews readers make apparently high incomes, but the cost of living in their areas keeps them squarely working class.
The best example I can give is in the Bay Area. I lucked out with $2850/month to rent a 1400 square foot house in San Leandro. Except that I worked in South San Francisco, and my commute was 45 minutes to 90 minutes each way, every day. I looked into it, even did the math with average commute times and Health and Human Services housing cost data, and found that if I wanted to cut 15 minutes off of that commute would cost me an extra $1000 a month, or I'd lose the yard and the other bedroom. With a kid, a stay-at-home spouse (a lot cheaper than child care given wages for my wife's field in the bay area) and a dog, that was just a non-starter. I knew people who drove in from Vacaville or Tracey, every day, just to keep the housing prices within their means.
Prior to that experience, I honestly thought $140K a year was the best I could ever hope for. I was top 15% of individual wage earners in the country but I was considerably more stressed out than when I was making minimum wage at an office supply store in suburban Oregon.
- vel0city 4y agoEver thought about maybe not living in California? You don't need to be on the West Coast to have a tech job.
- avmich 4y agoThis is the thought which comes around often. The problem is, for an intellectual, it's important to live in an environment rich with mental talent. Bay Area is the intellectual capital of the world, and while Einstein could maintain his patent clerkship and have famous physicists visit him in Bern (http://norvig.com/performance-review.html http://norvig.com/performance-review.html) for the lesser minds in another era settling on another place is a loss.
- selimthegrim 4y ago<s>Yes, because all universities in the US are in 5 places only. </s>
- nobaddays 4y ago> Bay Area is the intellectual capital of the world, Lol. Damn, the 0 interest rate era/tech bubble really made you guys cocky didnt it
- queuebert 4y agoDon't you know the greatest minds in the world are solving the extremely important problem of getting as many clicks on an ad as possible?
- vel0city 4y agoSo your argument is the only place to find intellectual people to hang out with is the Bay Area? I grew up surrounded by literally rocket scientists and some of the top minds in biochemistry and mechanical engineering as neighbors. Incredibly intellectual people. I did not grow up in California. Its not like the Bay Area is the only place with smart people.
- alistairSH 4y agoBay Area is the intellectual capital of the world Say what? Switzerland (or possibly Slovenia) has the highest STEM PhDs per capita. There are many counties and cities in the US with higher PhD rates than any of the Bay Area counties. Most have major R1 unis, but not all. SV is the VC capital of the world. I'll give you that. But, that's not even remotely the same as being the intellectual capital.
- cowpig 4y agoI agree about as much with the idea that the Bay Area is the intellectual capital of the world as I do with the idea that "STEM PhDs per capita" is somehow a measure of intellect.
- petsfed 4y agoI was living happily in Wyoming when my employer said "move to California, or find another job" which, if you don't know the Wyoming economy, translated to "leave Wyoming for us, leave Wyoming for somebody else, or go work in a coal mine".
- wyclif 4y agoThat's interesting but unfortunate. To me, the goal would be to do just that: live in Wyoming but work for a coastal tech employer.
- bumby 4y agoWhy a “coastal” tech employer? The wages in SV price in the cost of living to a certain extent. I’m assuming if the remote work pattern continues, we can’t be expected to make coastal salaries while living in rural Wyoming any more that we would expect a FAANG company to pay an overseas employee SV salaries.
- petsfed 4y agoI work in embedded systems, firmware and hardware. Unfortunately, I've got a solid decade of professional development before I can justify going freelance competitively. The thousands of dollars in test equipment is quite the barrier. But even if I wasn't in a field that requires time spent hands-on with the physical hardware, a lot of companies (my former employer in the Bay Area amongst them) insist on in-person work for most positions, even if the position doesn't really require it. And so it goes, people making $60K in Wichita or wherever glibly say "I can get a house for $180K, you make 5 times what I make, complaining about million dollar homes is just a rich person lacking perspective". Even if you do the math and show that holy cow, homes are expensive in tech hubs, even considering the median income, all people see is how high the median income, and assume that there's no real problem.
- deleted 4y ago[deleted]
- vel0city 4y agoI get that. Wyoming sure can be beautiful and full of certain opportunities but embedded software isn't often one of those. There are markets other than California and Wyoming though. I'm sure you're aware, but its always good to compare compensation versus living expenses. Almost every time I've been given a chance to move it meant I'd be trading my lifestyle in a negative direction (from my perspective) and smaller savings in the end even if the salary was over 2x my current. Everyone has their own priorities in life though, I hope you find a way to achieve yours. Good luck in life friend.
- PeterisP 4y agoIn effect, your example demonstrates that a key effect of USA tech industry is taking vast amounts of customers' and tech investors' money and handing it over to California landlords / real estate investors.
- bumby 4y agoDon’t you think the amount of remote work has changed that? I think part of the problem is the presumed loss aversion of moving from a $300k salary to, say, a $175k one that is remote but allows for a better standard of living (particularly for families).
- bdangubic 4y agoYou say this as if getting a fully remote job that pays $175k is easy to come by… I’d guess that most people making $300k in high-priced areas would take this paycut to $175k every day of the week and twice on sunday if they were offered
- deleted 4y ago[deleted]
- 4m1rk 4y agoThis just doesn't make sense to me. The employer can hire two instead of one while getting the same performance. Supposing we're not talking about 8+ hours timezone difference, it's much more valuable than just having someone physically in the office!
- deroanth 4y agoI keep wanting to think this way as well, but then I am reminded that there are more costs for a position than just the salary most of the time. Lots of administrative overhead. I don't know actual numbers, but it's probably more of a conversion of one position into two for 30-40% of the salary at best.
- bumby 4y agoIf any industry is poised well to make relatively high pay anywhere, it’s tech. It’s speculation on my part, but I assume tech has one of the highest remote work percentages. This is a phenomenon that is prevalent in other industries, without that remote work luxury. Oil and gas workers get paid handsomely but often have to live near the worksite. Even then, rent is astronomical without all the luxuries that SV offers.