6 ms·

Just make sure you don't live in those cities proper :P

by huu 13y ago

jamesaguilar 13y ago
You can do it there too. I'd guess the average entry-level programmer in SF makes 80k a year. 2000/mo on rent (which is honestly a pretty nice place if you're sharing) leaves you with 20k to play with while still saving netting about 20k after taxes. Of course, if you live in the valley, you could save more, but the point is to illustrate that many (single, no dependents) tech workers can live in SF and still save.
- ars_technician 13y ago
  Your math implies 64k after taxes, which is only 20% and is completely wrong. The effective tax rate in Cali after federal and state is closer to 40%. That leaves 48k after taxes. Take out the 24k you blew on the 2k/mo apt and you're down to 24k and you haven't even put food on your plate or paid for transportation costs. Take out 4k for food assuming you don't eat at nice restaurants. Take out 2k for a train pass and maybe another 0.5k for other transportation when the train isn't adequate. You are now down to 17.5k and you haven't saved anything or done anything 'to play'. There is a reason the poverty level is around 70k in that area. 80k looks good on paper but in reality it's crap. It's about parity with a 37k salary in Austin, TX. http://www.bestplaces.net/cost-of-living/san-francisco-ca/austin-tx/80000 http://www.bestplaces.net/cost-of-living/san-francisco-ca/au...
  - jamesaguilar 13y ago
    I don't think it'll be 40% for someone making 80k per year. The effective federal rate on the first 80k is around 20%. The CA rate should be 9-10%. Maybe another 5% for soc sec. But I also made a very generous assumption re: apartment spend. I think my point stands.
    - ars_technician 13y ago
      No, it doesn't still stand. You just adjusted from your initial 20% up to 35%, which essentially eliminates most of the 'savings' money you mentioned in your post. Also, the apartment assumption isn't that generous. If you want to live in SF by yourself, that's what you will pay for a decent apt.
      - jamesaguilar 13y ago
        > If you want to live in SF by yourself Oh, sorry, I thought we were talking about someone who is making the bare minimum effort to save money. My mistake.
        ars_technician 13y ago
        That doesn't even make sense. If someone is making the bare minimum effort, then they would probably live by themselves. Are you sure you thought that message through?
        jamesaguilar 13y ago
        No, if you live by yourself in SF, you are not making any realistic effort to save money, because you have not attempted to optimize your largest expense. OK, I'm done talking about this shifted scenario from what we started talking about. When you want to talk about how hard it is to save money in SF if you actually make any serious effort, I'm happy to resume.
        ars_technician 13y ago
        Read your own message. You said you said the following: >I thought we were talking about someone who is making the bare minimum effort to save money Do you know what the bare minimum effort means? You are the one suggesting bare minimum effort now.
        jamesaguilar 13y ago
    - dragonwriter 13y ago
      > I don't think it'll be 40% for someone making 80k per year. It won't. At 2013 rates, on $80k of total income for an individual ($73,900 in income subject to income tax with the $6,100 standard deduction, but no other deductions/credits): Effective federal income tax on total income: 18.0% Effective CA income tax rate on total income: 5.72% SS+Medicare: 7.65% California State Disability Insurance tax: 1.00% Total effective income and payroll tax rate: 32.4%
- pkteison 13y ago
  I don't see how the numbers work out that well. http://www.payrollforamerica.com/calculators/California-payroll-calculator.php http://www.payrollforamerica.com/calculators/California-payr... suggests the numbers are: $13.4k to feds, $5k social security, $1.1k medicare, $5k california, $800 CA SDI Leaving you with $54,725. $24k to housing and $20k to savings would leave you with just over $10k to eat, shop, pay for transportation, etc. So, don't try to have a car. Even carless, though, it seems much easier / more likely / more realistic to do it the other way around - $20k on food/entertainment/shopping/etc and $10k to savings.
  - jamesaguilar 13y ago
    Granted. I was too generous on the housing budget, but too conservative on tax expenses.

Just make sure you don't live in those cities proper :P

by huu 13y ago

Just make sure you don't live in those cities proper :P

You can do it there too. I'd guess the average entry-level programmer in SF makes 80k a year. 2000/mo on rent (which is honestly a pretty nice place if you're sharing) leaves you with 20k to play with while still saving netting about 20k after taxes. Of course, if you live in the valley, you could save more, but the point is to illustrate that many (single, no dependents) tech workers can live in SF and still save.

ars_technician 13y ago
Your math implies 64k after taxes, which is only 20% and is completely wrong. The effective tax rate in Cali after federal and state is closer to 40%. That leaves 48k after taxes. Take out the 24k you blew on the 2k/mo apt and you're down to 24k and you haven't even put food on your plate or paid for transportation costs. Take out 4k for food assuming you don't eat at nice restaurants. Take out 2k for a train pass and maybe another 0.5k for other transportation when the train isn't adequate. You are now down to 17.5k and you haven't saved anything or done anything 'to play'. There is a reason the poverty level is around 70k in that area. 80k looks good on paper but in reality it's crap. It's about parity with a 37k salary in Austin, TX. http://www.bestplaces.net/cost-of-living/san-francisco-ca/austin-tx/80000 http://www.bestplaces.net/cost-of-living/san-francisco-ca/au...
- jamesaguilar 13y ago
  I don't think it'll be 40% for someone making 80k per year. The effective federal rate on the first 80k is around 20%. The CA rate should be 9-10%. Maybe another 5% for soc sec. But I also made a very generous assumption re: apartment spend. I think my point stands.
  - ars_technician 13y ago
    No, it doesn't still stand. You just adjusted from your initial 20% up to 35%, which essentially eliminates most of the 'savings' money you mentioned in your post. Also, the apartment assumption isn't that generous. If you want to live in SF by yourself, that's what you will pay for a decent apt.
    - jamesaguilar 13y ago
      > If you want to live in SF by yourself Oh, sorry, I thought we were talking about someone who is making the bare minimum effort to save money. My mistake.
      - ars_technician 13y ago
        That doesn't even make sense. If someone is making the bare minimum effort, then they would probably live by themselves. Are you sure you thought that message through?
        jamesaguilar 13y ago
        No, if you live by yourself in SF, you are not making any realistic effort to save money, because you have not attempted to optimize your largest expense. OK, I'm done talking about this shifted scenario from what we started talking about. When you want to talk about how hard it is to save money in SF if you actually make any serious effort, I'm happy to resume.
        ars_technician 13y ago
        Read your own message. You said you said the following: >I thought we were talking about someone who is making the bare minimum effort to save money Do you know what the bare minimum effort means? You are the one suggesting bare minimum effort now.
        jamesaguilar 13y ago
  - dragonwriter 13y ago
    > I don't think it'll be 40% for someone making 80k per year. It won't. At 2013 rates, on $80k of total income for an individual ($73,900 in income subject to income tax with the $6,100 standard deduction, but no other deductions/credits): Effective federal income tax on total income: 18.0% Effective CA income tax rate on total income: 5.72% SS+Medicare: 7.65% California State Disability Insurance tax: 1.00% Total effective income and payroll tax rate: 32.4%
pkteison 13y ago
I don't see how the numbers work out that well. http://www.payrollforamerica.com/calculators/California-payroll-calculator.php http://www.payrollforamerica.com/calculators/California-payr... suggests the numbers are: $13.4k to feds, $5k social security, $1.1k medicare, $5k california, $800 CA SDI Leaving you with $54,725. $24k to housing and $20k to savings would leave you with just over $10k to eat, shop, pay for transportation, etc. So, don't try to have a car. Even carless, though, it seems much easier / more likely / more realistic to do it the other way around - $20k on food/entertainment/shopping/etc and $10k to savings.
- jamesaguilar 13y ago
  Granted. I was too generous on the housing budget, but too conservative on tax expenses.