4 ms·

You just can't live in the Bay anymore, that's all there is to it. It'd be great if you could. But anything within a 2 hour commute requires a minimum of $200k

You just can't live in the Bay anymore, that's all there is to it. It'd be great if you could. But anything within a 2 hour commute requires a minimum of $200k salary to survive, let alone get ahead. Unless you're inheriting your parents house or piling into a roommate situation, it's just completely undoable over the long term. Compare this to NYC which has innumerable options when it comes to suburbs, with better transit, lower taxes, reasonably priced homes, and far greater apartment options. I don't see how SF ends up as anything but a place for raising capital in the future. The (true) middle class tech worker dream is dead and gone there.

jakeydus 1mo ago
SF is my favorite city in the world, but as a tech worker in a flyover state I've given up on it being anything but a nice place to visit. I couldn't afford it alone, let alone with my family.
- jjav 1mo ago
  SF is not Silicon Valley (arguably, depending on your generation, it is not even part of Silicon Valley). Housing it a lot more reasonable (nowhere near cheap, but feasible) in the actual Silicon Valley.
  - jakeydus 1mo ago
    Unfortunately I don't particularly care for SV. I left my heart in San Francisco. I love the fog, the density, the hills, the food, the diversity, the transit, and the ocean. Silicon Valley has some of that, and it's in close enough proximity to be able to work in SF or visit regularly, but my dream is to live in Sunset or Haight-Ashbury in an ancient house and ride my bike around town with my girls. Maybe someday.
rootsudo 1mo ago
This, 100%. Seattle is ranked #2 but the cost is ballooning and the environment is very much east coast vs west coast USA. It used to be better, remote I feel is better in Seattle but the hidden costs of being in the Seattle region involve possible commute, car purchase and the general RTA, fragmented neighborhoods, public transit is improving but nothing near what is nyc. Housing… I feel is cheaper in nyc, food across the board is much more inexpensive in much. Hotels are varied and more inexpensive in nyc. One thing I have enjoyed is time zone differences. 3 hours difference is a lot and if you can balance that you can have a wonderful Seattle afternoon. Problem is winter sucks in PNW.
- shepardrtc 1mo ago
  I lived in Seattle for a couple of years, out in one of the suburbs (West Seattle). I would say that housing cost is the primary issue in Seattle, but its nowhere near San Francisco. Outside of that, public transit is pretty good. I have gone back and forth across the city, to Bellevue, even to Olympia, on public transit very cheaply and within a reasonable amount of time. The light rail recently opened up to Bellevue, though Bellevue is not really all that much cheaper lol. The food didn't feel super expensive, but it definitely wasn't great. San Francisco and NYC are so much better. I have been consistently disappointed with the food in Seattle. The one issue I see with Seattle is that they have a 30% or so vacancy rate for office buildings in downtown. A lot of companies have left, or will be moving. Many to Bellevue. The city decided to target businesses to fund more progressive policies, but with remote work, the businesses just moved across Lake Washington. Or to other states (like Starbucks). I don't see that changing. So now they have a budget deficit, lots of office vacancies, and the looming threat of more companies leaving. Not sure if that'll change it's standing or anything, but its not great.
malfist 1mo ago
You just can. Nearly a million people do
- ramesh31 1mo ago
  >"You just can. Nearly a million people do" And that number hasn't budged in decades. It is a completely ossified community. There's the folks who bought their houses 20-30 years ago and stayed put thanks to prop 17, their adult children living with them waiting for them to die, the young single tech workers willing to fork out $3k for a studio or live with roommates, the nepotized $300k+ earning public service employees, and the rest of the non-tech workers resigned to the crime-ridden pockets of the east/south bay that can still be afforded with an entire family's income. That's basically the entire population.
- scoofy 1mo ago
  You can't. I'm in SF, and you need to realize that the people already here are not paying the market rates for housing, either via rent or via property taxes. The current rate for a two bedroom in most of SF is approaching $6000/month right now. Apartments at $5000 have lines of applicants. My partner and I are paying about half that for our apartment... and we haven't lived here that long. If we were trying to move here for work now, we absolutely wouldn't be able to afford it.
  - malfist 1mo ago
    You're literally living in SF right now and talk about the line of applicants for rent. You are literally describing a place people live and are living in.
    - scoofy 1mo ago
      When there is a line of 50 people to see an apartment, and there are only 10 apartments in the city this month, 40 of those people aren't going to be able to afford housing. We're living in a real life game of musical chairs here. Yes. Couples with two incomes and successful careers can build a life here. The question is how normal, single people build a life here.
mcntsh 1mo ago
A 200k salary is what... 13k net? You're telling me that income is just surviving in the Bay Area?
- NewJazz 1mo ago
  Yeah that's being very dramatic. Rent in oakland is not that high. Even at $160k you can scrape by in SF proper in a studio.
- deleted 1mo ago
  [deleted]
- atleastoptimal 1mo ago
  It's not accurate. I don't know where people get these numbers from, perhaps they just vibe based on headlines without looking at the actual data. Studios all within 1 hour of SF by BART cost at most 2,500 but usually around 2000, cheaper if you're in Oakland/Daly city. 2000*12 is 24000, so if you're take home salary is at least 73,000 you're making a healthy multiple over rent. Just making 120k in the Bay area you're taking home 84,000 per year. So if you're making 200k you're taking home $10,700 per month, so you can afford a 3,500 rent at most, which could easily get you a nice 2 bedroom within 30 minutes of downtown SF.
  - ramesh31 1mo ago
    Right, you can live the "single guy in an apartment" life with a hellacious commute still for sure. Add a family or any desire to ever own a home and you can forget it though.
    - atleastoptimal 1mo ago
      If you're a young person making a certain amount of money I'm certain you can plan to save up money over time. Especially if you're a dual-income couple, you could save money before you plan to buy a house or have a kid. A 2 bedroom is affordable on two 100k salaries in the Bay area. but even then the entire area is very large, not everyone lives in SF or wants to, or would need to commute there as there are jobs elsewhere.
atleastoptimal 1mo ago
>You need a 200k salary to live without roommates within 2 hours of downtown SF That's a bit of an exaggeration. You could rent a 1/2br in SF proper with that salary. You could easily live within 40 minutes of SF in East Bay/Daly City comfortably at 120k.
G3nD 1mo ago
I was nodding along until the NYC part. Up until ~6 months ago, NYC was more expensive than SF.
- ramesh31 1mo ago
  Point is the dropoff outside the city limits. NYC salaries are mostly comparable to SF at this point, while you can buy a home under $500k still within an hour commute to the city. That's a fantasy in the Bay.
  - evanelias 1mo ago
    That's largely a fantasy in the NYC metro area as well. Unless you're talking about a tiny condo, and/or your office is extremely close to a major transit hub.
- catlover76 1mo ago
  [dead]
jjav 1mo ago
> But anything within a 2 hour commute requires a minimum of $200k salary to survive 2 hour commute is a huge distance, so this is nowhere near true. 2 hours east is roughly Grass Valley, or anything in between (including Sacramento). 2 hours north is roughly Boonville, or anything in between. 2 hours south, depends which way you go, but could be Soledad, or anything in between. (commute times from google maps) That's a huge range, and all of those towns are far cheaper than anything in the Bay Area/Silicon Valley.
- ramesh31 1mo ago
  >2 hours east is roughly Grass Valley, or anything in between (including Sacramento). Tell me you've never lived in the Bay... 2 hours is Antioch/Pittsburgh in an average rush hour.
  - jjav 1mo ago
    > Tell me you've never lived in the Bay... I guess I'm a newcomer, only lived in Silicon Valley for ~30 years (will be 30 in a few months).

jakeydus 1mo ago

SF is my favorite city in the world, but as a tech worker in a flyover state I've given up on it being anything but a nice place to visit. I couldn't afford it alone, let alone with my family.

jjav 1mo ago
SF is not Silicon Valley (arguably, depending on your generation, it is not even part of Silicon Valley). Housing it a lot more reasonable (nowhere near cheap, but feasible) in the actual Silicon Valley.
- jakeydus 1mo ago
  Unfortunately I don't particularly care for SV. I left my heart in San Francisco. I love the fog, the density, the hills, the food, the diversity, the transit, and the ocean. Silicon Valley has some of that, and it's in close enough proximity to be able to work in SF or visit regularly, but my dream is to live in Sunset or Haight-Ashbury in an ancient house and ride my bike around town with my girls. Maybe someday.

rootsudo 1mo ago

This, 100%. Seattle is ranked #2 but the cost is ballooning and the environment is very much east coast vs west coast USA. It used to be better, remote I feel is better in Seattle but the hidden costs of being in the Seattle region involve possible commute, car purchase and the general RTA, fragmented neighborhoods, public transit is improving but nothing near what is nyc. Housing… I feel is cheaper in nyc, food across the board is much more inexpensive in much. Hotels are varied and more inexpensive in nyc. One thing I have enjoyed is time zone differences. 3 hours difference is a lot and if you can balance that you can have a wonderful Seattle afternoon. Problem is winter sucks in PNW.

shepardrtc 1mo ago
I lived in Seattle for a couple of years, out in one of the suburbs (West Seattle). I would say that housing cost is the primary issue in Seattle, but its nowhere near San Francisco. Outside of that, public transit is pretty good. I have gone back and forth across the city, to Bellevue, even to Olympia, on public transit very cheaply and within a reasonable amount of time. The light rail recently opened up to Bellevue, though Bellevue is not really all that much cheaper lol. The food didn't feel super expensive, but it definitely wasn't great. San Francisco and NYC are so much better. I have been consistently disappointed with the food in Seattle. The one issue I see with Seattle is that they have a 30% or so vacancy rate for office buildings in downtown. A lot of companies have left, or will be moving. Many to Bellevue. The city decided to target businesses to fund more progressive policies, but with remote work, the businesses just moved across Lake Washington. Or to other states (like Starbucks). I don't see that changing. So now they have a budget deficit, lots of office vacancies, and the looming threat of more companies leaving. Not sure if that'll change it's standing or anything, but its not great.

malfist 1mo ago

You just can. Nearly a million people do

ramesh31 1mo ago
>"You just can. Nearly a million people do" And that number hasn't budged in decades. It is a completely ossified community. There's the folks who bought their houses 20-30 years ago and stayed put thanks to prop 17, their adult children living with them waiting for them to die, the young single tech workers willing to fork out $3k for a studio or live with roommates, the nepotized $300k+ earning public service employees, and the rest of the non-tech workers resigned to the crime-ridden pockets of the east/south bay that can still be afforded with an entire family's income. That's basically the entire population.
scoofy 1mo ago
You can't. I'm in SF, and you need to realize that the people already here are not paying the market rates for housing, either via rent or via property taxes. The current rate for a two bedroom in most of SF is approaching $6000/month right now. Apartments at $5000 have lines of applicants. My partner and I are paying about half that for our apartment... and we haven't lived here that long. If we were trying to move here for work now, we absolutely wouldn't be able to afford it.
- malfist 1mo ago
  You're literally living in SF right now and talk about the line of applicants for rent. You are literally describing a place people live and are living in.
  - scoofy 1mo ago
    When there is a line of 50 people to see an apartment, and there are only 10 apartments in the city this month, 40 of those people aren't going to be able to afford housing. We're living in a real life game of musical chairs here. Yes. Couples with two incomes and successful careers can build a life here. The question is how normal, single people build a life here.

mcntsh 1mo ago

A 200k salary is what... 13k net? You're telling me that income is just surviving in the Bay Area?

NewJazz 1mo ago
Yeah that's being very dramatic. Rent in oakland is not that high. Even at $160k you can scrape by in SF proper in a studio.
deleted 1mo ago
[deleted]
atleastoptimal 1mo ago
It's not accurate. I don't know where people get these numbers from, perhaps they just vibe based on headlines without looking at the actual data. Studios all within 1 hour of SF by BART cost at most 2,500 but usually around 2000, cheaper if you're in Oakland/Daly city. 2000*12 is 24000, so if you're take home salary is at least 73,000 you're making a healthy multiple over rent. Just making 120k in the Bay area you're taking home 84,000 per year. So if you're making 200k you're taking home $10,700 per month, so you can afford a 3,500 rent at most, which could easily get you a nice 2 bedroom within 30 minutes of downtown SF.
- ramesh31 1mo ago
  Right, you can live the "single guy in an apartment" life with a hellacious commute still for sure. Add a family or any desire to ever own a home and you can forget it though.
  - atleastoptimal 1mo ago
    If you're a young person making a certain amount of money I'm certain you can plan to save up money over time. Especially if you're a dual-income couple, you could save money before you plan to buy a house or have a kid. A 2 bedroom is affordable on two 100k salaries in the Bay area. but even then the entire area is very large, not everyone lives in SF or wants to, or would need to commute there as there are jobs elsewhere.

atleastoptimal 1mo ago

>You need a 200k salary to live without roommates within 2 hours of downtown SF That's a bit of an exaggeration. You could rent a 1/2br in SF proper with that salary. You could easily live within 40 minutes of SF in East Bay/Daly City comfortably at 120k.

G3nD 1mo ago

I was nodding along until the NYC part. Up until ~6 months ago, NYC was more expensive than SF.

ramesh31 1mo ago
Point is the dropoff outside the city limits. NYC salaries are mostly comparable to SF at this point, while you can buy a home under $500k still within an hour commute to the city. That's a fantasy in the Bay.
- evanelias 1mo ago
  That's largely a fantasy in the NYC metro area as well. Unless you're talking about a tiny condo, and/or your office is extremely close to a major transit hub.
catlover76 1mo ago
[dead]

jjav 1mo ago

> But anything within a 2 hour commute requires a minimum of $200k salary to survive 2 hour commute is a huge distance, so this is nowhere near true. 2 hours east is roughly Grass Valley, or anything in between (including Sacramento). 2 hours north is roughly Boonville, or anything in between. 2 hours south, depends which way you go, but could be Soledad, or anything in between. (commute times from google maps) That's a huge range, and all of those towns are far cheaper than anything in the Bay Area/Silicon Valley.

ramesh31 1mo ago
>2 hours east is roughly Grass Valley, or anything in between (including Sacramento). Tell me you've never lived in the Bay... 2 hours is Antioch/Pittsburgh in an average rush hour.
- jjav 1mo ago
  > Tell me you've never lived in the Bay... I guess I'm a newcomer, only lived in Silicon Valley for ~30 years (will be 30 in a few months).