5 ms·

> "your earnings generally scale with living expenses" My understanding is that earnings scale by city, but not as steeply as living expenses, for most people

> "your earnings generally scale with living expenses" My understanding is that earnings scale by city, but not as steeply as living expenses, for most people in the software world. You might make 10-20% less in a largeish city in the midwest than you would in Seattle or the Bay Area, but your house costs 60-80% less and most other things cost 10-20% less. Thought of a different way: for 10-20% less than a low-end 600 square foot condo in Mountain View, you can buy a 4000 square foot house on half an acre in Denver. Sure, there's a lot more to consider -- weather, proximity to family, the specific job offers and costs you're likely to incur. But your money goes a lot farther than you might realize in flyover country.

seanmcdirmid 13y ago
The companies will often argue the N% discount on wages is directly related to the N% reduced living expenses, which is of course insane. It is impossible to even to begin to justify making $75k in St. Louis if you can make $150k in San Francisco, housing costs and living expenses are not that crazily different. People in richer cities travel more internationally, they do and buy things that many Midwesterners would never even dream of doing. A Mercedes is similar in cost in New York as it is in Cleveland. The wages are lower because the living standards are lower, it's not just about living expenses.
- lotharbot 13y ago
  > "It is impossible to even to begin to justify making $75k in St. Louis if you can make $150k in San Francisco" The data suggests the divide is not nearly that large for the majority of software engineers. More like $80-90k in flyover country vs $100k in Seattle or $110k in SF -- and a lot of those gains are wiped out by higher taxes. Having $20k less net income and $20k less net housing expenses each year works out about even, and you can still buy the same number of Mercedes or international trips. Sure, if you're one of those rare few at the top of the food chain who could be making $200k in St Louis or $500k in the bay area, it's hard to justify living in St Louis. But there are plenty of people in software who justify living in the middle of the country because the "lower" salary is quite competitive for them (as always, do the math for yourself) and they like the lifestyle/weather/whatever. For reference, I lived in Seattle for 10 years and Denver for 20, and I've always been around software engineers (including my wife and my father.) I know the standard of living the majority of software engineers have in both places. I also keep up with software engineers (family, former coworkers, and school friends) in other areas like NY, Chicago, Baltimore, and the bay area. My software engineer friends in "rich" cities didn't do or buy anything particularly different or more exotic than my software engineer friends in Denver.
- nilkn 13y ago
  > housing costs and living expenses are not that crazily different. Are you really sure you're familiar with housing in those two cities? I am, intimately so, and the difference is huge. It's absolutely crazily different. St. Louis is dirt cheap compared to San Francisco. SF housing is most certainly well more than twice as expensive. Also, I think your salary gap isn't necessarily representative of the norm. $75k is closer to starting salary in many medium-COL cities, and $150k is definitely not the starting salary for the vast majority of developers in San Francisco. Most start at something like $100k, which is actually borderline worse than $75k in certain cheaper areas (especially those without state income taxes, like Texas). All that said, I agree that one should probably take $150k in SF over $75k in St. Louis. I just disagree with the nuances of your post, based on experience.

seanmcdirmid 13y ago

The companies will often argue the N% discount on wages is directly related to the N% reduced living expenses, which is of course insane. It is impossible to even to begin to justify making $75k in St. Louis if you can make $150k in San Francisco, housing costs and living expenses are not that crazily different. People in richer cities travel more internationally, they do and buy things that many Midwesterners would never even dream of doing. A Mercedes is similar in cost in New York as it is in Cleveland. The wages are lower because the living standards are lower, it's not just about living expenses.

lotharbot 13y ago
> "It is impossible to even to begin to justify making $75k in St. Louis if you can make $150k in San Francisco" The data suggests the divide is not nearly that large for the majority of software engineers. More like $80-90k in flyover country vs $100k in Seattle or $110k in SF -- and a lot of those gains are wiped out by higher taxes. Having $20k less net income and $20k less net housing expenses each year works out about even, and you can still buy the same number of Mercedes or international trips. Sure, if you're one of those rare few at the top of the food chain who could be making $200k in St Louis or $500k in the bay area, it's hard to justify living in St Louis. But there are plenty of people in software who justify living in the middle of the country because the "lower" salary is quite competitive for them (as always, do the math for yourself) and they like the lifestyle/weather/whatever. For reference, I lived in Seattle for 10 years and Denver for 20, and I've always been around software engineers (including my wife and my father.) I know the standard of living the majority of software engineers have in both places. I also keep up with software engineers (family, former coworkers, and school friends) in other areas like NY, Chicago, Baltimore, and the bay area. My software engineer friends in "rich" cities didn't do or buy anything particularly different or more exotic than my software engineer friends in Denver.
nilkn 13y ago
> housing costs and living expenses are not that crazily different. Are you really sure you're familiar with housing in those two cities? I am, intimately so, and the difference is huge. It's absolutely crazily different. St. Louis is dirt cheap compared to San Francisco. SF housing is most certainly well more than twice as expensive. Also, I think your salary gap isn't necessarily representative of the norm. $75k is closer to starting salary in many medium-COL cities, and $150k is definitely not the starting salary for the vast majority of developers in San Francisco. Most start at something like $100k, which is actually borderline worse than $75k in certain cheaper areas (especially those without state income taxes, like Texas). All that said, I agree that one should probably take $150k in SF over $75k in St. Louis. I just disagree with the nuances of your post, based on experience.