6 ms·

All of those places have prohibitively high cost of living to make saving six months of salary very much not trivial. It's possible, but it isn't anywhere close

All of those places have prohibitively high cost of living to make saving six months of salary very much not trivial. It's possible, but it isn't anywhere close to trivial.

jamesaguilar 13y ago
I know the cost of living at least in SF, and it is my contention that most entry level engineers should be able to save six months expenses per year trivially. Of course, if you eat out every night and blow all your money on booze, partying, and the most upscale apartment you can find, it would be harder. But a person who is making any real effort would not find it difficult.
- ars_technician 13y ago
  >But a person who is making any real effort would not find it difficult. As long as they don't have a family or want to build equity in a home. The justifications for the costs in this thread are so myopic that it's baffling.
  - jamesaguilar 13y ago
    I guess if you plan on remaining an entry-level engineer for your whole life, it would indeed be difficult to afford a home in SF. (This bit about family and house is known as "shifting the goal-post," btw. We're talking about the ability of a single engineer to save six months' living expenses.)
    - ars_technician 13y ago
      Assuming a promotion is known as "shifting the goal-post" too. You are essentially saying you are correct as long as you make more money than the original amount specified. Okay, you said it's trivial for an entry-level engineer to save six months living expenses. That's $12k for housing and ~$4k for food and transportation. That's the majority of the leftover money after rent, taxes, transportation, and food for a year without any savings. I'm not sure you are correctly using the term 'trivial'.
      - jamesaguilar 13y ago
        No, it is not, because I am not assuming a promotion to prove my point re: whether you can save money in SF as a single engineer. You can. That's it.
        ars_technician 13y ago
        No offense, but I'm strongly inclined to believe that you are not making it by on 80k a year in SF, and if you made that little money at one point, it was not for an extended enough period of time for you to properly understand what it afforded you. Your estimates seem to be nothing more than back of the napkin calculations missing major components like half of the taxes. Your numbers fit to someone making 100k+. Edit: Also, you didn't even address the direct counter-point to your argument that the savings is "trivial".
        jamesaguilar 13y ago
        It does not offend me that you assume I make more money than I'm arguing over, and you are not wrong. I also lived in a $500/mo room in an apartment with two others when I made that much money, so I was saving like a boss. Travel was actually a larger expense than housing. As far as addressing counterpoints, I've grown tired of quibbling. I think that you can live comfortably spending 66% of your income net of taxes per year without any undue effort if you make $80k a year in SF. I think anyone who looks into it would find the same to be true. That's my last word in this conversation.
        ars_technician 13y ago
        >As far as addressing counterpoints, I've grown tired of quibbling. I think that you can live comfortably spending 66% of your income net of taxes per year without any undue effort if you make $80k a year in SF. I think anyone who looks into it would find the same to be true. That's my last word in this conversation. That's fine. As long as you can admit that you are just arm-chairing it and haven't actually had to live under those restrictions.
breckinloggins 13y ago
Nope. That's why the no dependents part is essential. If you are single and willing to live with roommates, you will be able to navigate the "high cost of living" pretty successfully. I'm living quite comfortably in San Francisco and spending a fraction of what I was spending in Texas. Why? - No car. No gas. No upkeep. No payments. No insurance. No inspections. No car. - Roommates. I HATE living alone so this was a no-brainer. If you insist on having your own place, then yeah it's probably going to sting. If not you can often find good deals. - Food. A tech job often provides free or free-ish food. Plus I can get reasonably-priced staples at the market on the corner of my block. The culture here makes it much less likely I'll spend $400/mo at Olive Garden, Chili's, and The Red Lobster. - Stuff. Don't need much. When I was in Texas I lived FAR away from anyone who really shared my geeky interests. I'm surrounded by them here. I simply don't have the urge to buy so much stuff to keep me occupied. I have the stuff I need and I spend most of my time doing things with people. These things are often free. Speaking of which... - "funcheap". SF is famous for this (as is NYC). You can ALWAYS find cool stuff to do that costs little or no money. You can also, of course, find stuff that costs a lot of money. It's your choice, day by day. Now if I couldn't stand to live with roommates or had a family to support, this would be a whole different story. Also, "high cost of living" really means $$$/sq ft vs $$/sq ft. It IS outrageous in places, but I'm much happier in my apartment with 1 bedroom to myself than I was in a 2600 square foot house in Texas. So yes, price per square foot is going to hurt on paper, but if "size doesn't matter", you might end up paying less by actual dollars. Your mileage may vary, of course, but I'm pretty passionate about this since I stuck around in places that weren't right for me a lot longer than I should have... simply because I let popular rhetoric convince me that only dot com millionaires could afford to live in the Bay Area. They were wrong, and I was a fool for listening to them instead of exploring it for myself. Don't make my mistakes.
- jlgreco 13y ago
  Honestly I think roommates isn't a requirement (at least in most of those cities) either.
  - PittedPrune 13y ago
    um, what? With tiny 400 square foot apartments going for 2500 in San Francisco... how can you possibly say that?
AznHisoka 13y ago
I dunno why people always say NY is expensive... have you ever lived there? Live in NJ, rent a basement somewhere in Queens, or heck you can rent an apartment in Chinatown for $800/month. I know people who rent an entire floor, and then sub-rent it to their friends, so they end up paying $0.00 for rent. Don't eat out everyday. Bring your lunch everyday. It can be done.
- omegant 13y ago
  Why is chinatown so cheap? How livable are those apartments?.
  - look_lookatme 13y ago
    I would think a Manhattan Chinatown full apt for anything less than 2K would be a unicorn. However the parent is right about Jersey and Queens. Also places on the Metro North or LIRR. It's entirely possible to live near NYC and work there everyday for a reasonable cost of living.
mmanfrin 13y ago
Prohibitively high if you want to live in walking distance to your job. I work in SF, have a 15 minute commute, and pay a tiny amount for rent because I live in Oakland. Pretty easy to save.
- breckinloggins 13y ago
  I live walking distance to my job and live in the heart of San Francisco right next to BART. I pay very little money in rent. Patience on Craigslist pays off.
  - PittedPrune 13y ago
    I would sure love to know what "very little" is to you. I have a hard time believing your rent is less than $1500, and I certainly wouldn't consider that "very little". Given how relative one's perception of costs can be, would you mind being a little more explicit about your rent?
    - breckinloggins 13y ago
      It's a little over half of that. And it was one of several places like that I found so I know it wasn't just "luck". It was not as simple as just "get on Craigslist and find something", though. I had to watch it carefully. EDIT: Just checked Craigslist and I can STILL find stuff for under $1000/mo in numerous places in SF. The trick seems to be looking under "rooms / shared" and also not expecting to find a place in Pac Heights ;-)

All of those places have prohibitively high cost of living to make saving six months of salary very much not trivial. It's possible, but it isn't anywhere close to trivial.

jamesaguilar 13y ago

I know the cost of living at least in SF, and it is my contention that most entry level engineers should be able to save six months expenses per year trivially. Of course, if you eat out every night and blow all your money on booze, partying, and the most upscale apartment you can find, it would be harder. But a person who is making any real effort would not find it difficult.

ars_technician 13y ago
>But a person who is making any real effort would not find it difficult. As long as they don't have a family or want to build equity in a home. The justifications for the costs in this thread are so myopic that it's baffling.
- jamesaguilar 13y ago
  I guess if you plan on remaining an entry-level engineer for your whole life, it would indeed be difficult to afford a home in SF. (This bit about family and house is known as "shifting the goal-post," btw. We're talking about the ability of a single engineer to save six months' living expenses.)
  - ars_technician 13y ago
    Assuming a promotion is known as "shifting the goal-post" too. You are essentially saying you are correct as long as you make more money than the original amount specified. Okay, you said it's trivial for an entry-level engineer to save six months living expenses. That's $12k for housing and ~$4k for food and transportation. That's the majority of the leftover money after rent, taxes, transportation, and food for a year without any savings. I'm not sure you are correctly using the term 'trivial'.
    - jamesaguilar 13y ago
      No, it is not, because I am not assuming a promotion to prove my point re: whether you can save money in SF as a single engineer. You can. That's it.
      - ars_technician 13y ago
        No offense, but I'm strongly inclined to believe that you are not making it by on 80k a year in SF, and if you made that little money at one point, it was not for an extended enough period of time for you to properly understand what it afforded you. Your estimates seem to be nothing more than back of the napkin calculations missing major components like half of the taxes. Your numbers fit to someone making 100k+. Edit: Also, you didn't even address the direct counter-point to your argument that the savings is "trivial".
        jamesaguilar 13y ago
        It does not offend me that you assume I make more money than I'm arguing over, and you are not wrong. I also lived in a $500/mo room in an apartment with two others when I made that much money, so I was saving like a boss. Travel was actually a larger expense than housing. As far as addressing counterpoints, I've grown tired of quibbling. I think that you can live comfortably spending 66% of your income net of taxes per year without any undue effort if you make $80k a year in SF. I think anyone who looks into it would find the same to be true. That's my last word in this conversation.
        ars_technician 13y ago
        >As far as addressing counterpoints, I've grown tired of quibbling. I think that you can live comfortably spending 66% of your income net of taxes per year without any undue effort if you make $80k a year in SF. I think anyone who looks into it would find the same to be true. That's my last word in this conversation. That's fine. As long as you can admit that you are just arm-chairing it and haven't actually had to live under those restrictions.

breckinloggins 13y ago

Nope. That's why the no dependents part is essential. If you are single and willing to live with roommates, you will be able to navigate the "high cost of living" pretty successfully. I'm living quite comfortably in San Francisco and spending a fraction of what I was spending in Texas. Why? - No car. No gas. No upkeep. No payments. No insurance. No inspections. No car. - Roommates. I HATE living alone so this was a no-brainer. If you insist on having your own place, then yeah it's probably going to sting. If not you can often find good deals. - Food. A tech job often provides free or free-ish food. Plus I can get reasonably-priced staples at the market on the corner of my block. The culture here makes it much less likely I'll spend $400/mo at Olive Garden, Chili's, and The Red Lobster. - Stuff. Don't need much. When I was in Texas I lived FAR away from anyone who really shared my geeky interests. I'm surrounded by them here. I simply don't have the urge to buy so much stuff to keep me occupied. I have the stuff I need and I spend most of my time doing things with people. These things are often free. Speaking of which... - "funcheap". SF is famous for this (as is NYC). You can ALWAYS find cool stuff to do that costs little or no money. You can also, of course, find stuff that costs a lot of money. It's your choice, day by day. Now if I couldn't stand to live with roommates or had a family to support, this would be a whole different story. Also, "high cost of living" really means $$$/sq ft vs $$/sq ft. It IS outrageous in places, but I'm much happier in my apartment with 1 bedroom to myself than I was in a 2600 square foot house in Texas. So yes, price per square foot is going to hurt on paper, but if "size doesn't matter", you might end up paying less by actual dollars. Your mileage may vary, of course, but I'm pretty passionate about this since I stuck around in places that weren't right for me a lot longer than I should have... simply because I let popular rhetoric convince me that only dot com millionaires could afford to live in the Bay Area. They were wrong, and I was a fool for listening to them instead of exploring it for myself. Don't make my mistakes.

jlgreco 13y ago
Honestly I think roommates isn't a requirement (at least in most of those cities) either.
- PittedPrune 13y ago
  um, what? With tiny 400 square foot apartments going for 2500 in San Francisco... how can you possibly say that?

AznHisoka 13y ago

I dunno why people always say NY is expensive... have you ever lived there? Live in NJ, rent a basement somewhere in Queens, or heck you can rent an apartment in Chinatown for $800/month. I know people who rent an entire floor, and then sub-rent it to their friends, so they end up paying $0.00 for rent. Don't eat out everyday. Bring your lunch everyday. It can be done.

omegant 13y ago
Why is chinatown so cheap? How livable are those apartments?.
- look_lookatme 13y ago
  I would think a Manhattan Chinatown full apt for anything less than 2K would be a unicorn. However the parent is right about Jersey and Queens. Also places on the Metro North or LIRR. It's entirely possible to live near NYC and work there everyday for a reasonable cost of living.

mmanfrin 13y ago

Prohibitively high if you want to live in walking distance to your job. I work in SF, have a 15 minute commute, and pay a tiny amount for rent because I live in Oakland. Pretty easy to save.

breckinloggins 13y ago
I live walking distance to my job and live in the heart of San Francisco right next to BART. I pay very little money in rent. Patience on Craigslist pays off.
- PittedPrune 13y ago
  I would sure love to know what "very little" is to you. I have a hard time believing your rent is less than $1500, and I certainly wouldn't consider that "very little". Given how relative one's perception of costs can be, would you mind being a little more explicit about your rent?
  - breckinloggins 13y ago
    It's a little over half of that. And it was one of several places like that I found so I know it wasn't just "luck". It was not as simple as just "get on Craigslist and find something", though. I had to watch it carefully. EDIT: Just checked Craigslist and I can STILL find stuff for under $1000/mo in numerous places in SF. The trick seems to be looking under "rooms / shared" and also not expecting to find a place in Pac Heights ;-)