3 ms·
No, no they are not.* Several times in my career I have looked at moving to SF, and when it's gotten to the point of talking about salary and upscaling that to
by jrjarrett 12y ago
No, no they are not.*
Several times in my career I have looked at moving to SF, and when it's gotten to the point of talking about salary and upscaling that to what I made at the time, that's not true.
The numbers discussed were about 20% more, but that did not cover the huge delta in housing costs.
- mahyarm 12y agoWere you looking at google & co or a startup? Usually your bonus & stock compensation is around %40 of your total compensation. Startup stock is non-liquid, and therefore unusable.
- kansface 12y agoIt is true that you will spend proportionally more on housing here. It is also most likely true that your total savings will be higher here. EG, you could save 50K$/year in the valley whereas you could only save 20k$ a year working in Iowa. The 20K is much larger compared to the cost of living, but you will be better off when you retire if you squirreled away the 50K$. If you want to move to Iowa at that point, all the better, you can now afford a palace. This assumes you can incur the cost of moving and can stay employed.
- muzz 12y agoAnd if one purchases a property, they are on the receiving end of massive home price appreciation-- housing becomes an investment rather than an expense.