Hacker News Reader

Comment by jevinskie | Hacker News Reader

There is so much pressure, career-wise, to move to either the Bay Area, the West Coast in general, or a major urban hub.

I honestly like living in a semi-rural part of the Midwest. I like seeing fields and forests while driving to work. If I want to get out to some wilderness, I can do so in 15-30 minutes. I travel in a car that, I feel, offers me freedom. To boot, I have a nice, reserved spot in the garage below my apartment. I live downtown and I still feel great freedom/"space". I cant imagine being able to do anything like this in a place like SF or even Chicago.

My cost of living is very cheap. My commute is 15 minutes. I live close to my family. Why should I want to leave?

View on HN

With you all the way.

I have 11 acres, horses, a goat, cats, a dog, and I live 15 minutes from downtown and 17 minutes from work. This is in a mid-sized midwest city (Grand Rapids, MI). While I realize that I could achieve a substantial pay raise on one of the coasts, a similarly sized plot there would cost millions. I paid under 200k 5 years ago with a 1500sf house on it, and it's still probably only worth the mid 200k range after we improved it (cleared 6 acres of trees, planted and fenced a bunch of pasture, made significant improvements to the house). I could not achieve a similar lifestyle on an engineer's salary near a major urban center on a coast ... and I have no desire to move to one :).

Plus, I get to make avionics, which is on my short list of the best jobs ever.

That's an awesome setup and cost of living. If most of family and friends didnt have deep roots here I'd totally consider saying screw this place. Actually, I still may, but gonna ride it out a bit longer.

I know I found a Rails shop there in a search years ago, but generally speaking is there a tech career scene in GR? If so, are there any trends as far as the tech that companies are using that you can tell? I've got 3 acres with dogs and chickens here in NJ, but we have no family for a 10 hour radius and my wife's family is in Livingston county (don't want to be too close).

Thanks in advance.

> generally speaking is there a tech career scene in GR?

Not really.

There's plenty of tech work in GR, if your just looking for a job you probably won't have any problems. And there's plenty of social / networking events. GR definitely punches above it's weight for the region -- but not enough to compare to a real market.

Grand Rapids is closer to a small town than a major city, so despite our best efforts, there isn't really a scene that's comparable to anything like what I've seen in Minneapolis or Portland or Austin or even Milwaukee.

Of course, those places are larger and cost more. Low cost of living is great, (cheap housing even with good schools, lots of space, easy commutes, no crime, silly amounts of lawn and garden) but it has its own drawbacks (very low wages, worthless public transit, everything's suburban, greatly reduced career opportunities, etc)

I would personally prefer an urban lifestyle, and that's impossible to have in Michigan, which is frustrating to me. But if you want a suburban lifestyle in a ranch house with a huge yard, Grand Rapids is perfect for that. There's tons of those properties around for about $200k.

Switch is putting a large portion of its company into Grand Rapids in the near future. So we may be seeing more tech coming in.

L3 by chance?

I think this endorsement should be qualified. While it's true there is more space here in GR, there is a reason for that: people leave as soon as they can (for various reasons; the lack of sun (http://www1.ncdc.noaa.gov/pub/data/ccd-data/pctposrank.txt), lack of opportunity or even this vaguely defined yet very strong pressure to conform to an invisible fence of ideology. Change and outside ideas are slow to take root, to put it mildly.

I have worked in tech here for over 10 years and there are very few jobs. I've already used up Plans A, B and C. My next move will probably be somewhere else (if I'm still competitive). This is where you go to retire, not to advance your career.

No chickens??

I'm seriously looking this place up on Wikipedia.org. =)

The cost of living is definitely infinitely higher than living in the midwest but you certainly can find fields and forests (and actual mountains!) in the SF area. For example, the minute you cross the Golden Gate bridge, you are in Marin County, a county with a rich agricultural history, amazing natural places like Muir Woods (the setting for the ape's home in the latest Planet of the Apes), and 85.5% of it's land protected from development forever. Here's a photo from the Headlands (http://www.robertcampbellphotography.com/Images/Marin/Marin-...), you can see SF just in the background, it's about 10 miles away from Downtown to the place in the photo. If you live in Marin, you can also choose to take the Ferry which drops you off in Downtown SF as well.

If you go South-West of SF, you will hit Pacifica and Half Moon Bay which are quaint coastal towns that will make you forget that you're only 20 miles away from San Francisco.

Go East, past the hills of Berkeley and you hit more rural spread out developments near Orinda, Diablo, etc.

I'm glad you found balance with the things that are important to you which is what really matters. Me personally, I'm drawn to the coast and the great expanse of the Pacific Ocean. The SF area has it's fair share of urban problems, but then you also have amazing restaurants, a close-to-world-class arts scene, some of the best schools and hospitals in the country, the most impactful technology companies in the world, and the fair share of folks who have come West looking to make their mark on the world in Gold Rush 2.0.

P.S. I've spent a fair share of time in Detroit/Michigan and the area and as much as I love being able to buy a city block there, I can't live in a place that calls soy sauce on rice "Fried Rice".

Sadly, Marin County is "the boss-level kingdom of California NIMBYs":

https://twitter.com/kimmaicutler/status/735561614368202752

I support development but I'm kind of okay with not too much in Marin because there's no viable and fast public transit from there to SF so adding a bunch of people there doesn't make as much sense (I could also be rationalizing a bias towards keeping Marin green and "country" since I want to eventually settle down there..)

I really support development along established rail corridors along CalTrain and BART lines. There should be ridiculously tall housing towers in cheap places like Hayward and open places like Walnut Creek and Pleasanton, if only the BART was not so damn slow and so freakishly expensive.

I agree completely with keeping parks and other green space, but disagree with so little density in the actual built up areas.

Of course theres no BART in Marin due to racist local NIMBYs so there's a bit of a paradox involved.

This is not historically accurate. Marin voted in favor of BART, but after San Mateo country bailed, the costs were shifted North. It was the increased costs that prevented BART from going across the Golden Gate.

Didn't know that, thanks for filling in that gap....I had always thought it was just Marin elitism

Development along the existing CalTrain and BART lines makes a lot of sense. Though it would be great if there were good public transit options in Marin, the reality is that neither CalTrain nor BART will ever go there. The development is just too expensive at this point.

Prediction: the gentrification currently happening in Oakland will soon spread to Richmond and Vallejo. Vallejo, it's crime problems aside, actually makes a lot of sense. There's a ferry there and cheap housing.

I find it a little misleading to point out that there is no CalTrain to Marin while omitting to note that there is regularly-scheduled ferry service to Marin.

The ferries are just as fast and definitely more pleasant than CalTrain. (BART though is faster, I'm pretty sure.)

The ferries are not a similar option to CalTrain or BART. I live in Marin and could recite you from memory the Larkspur ferry schedule without blinking. When I worked in SF my commute was tightly coupled to the ferry schedule. In addition, the ferry only stops at the ferry building. Once you're off the boat, you still have to walk/MUNI/Bart to your final destination.

Also, if you are in San Francisco after 10pm, no more ferry for you. BART, CalTrain, and Muni are all much more flexible options.

"Sadly, Marin County is "the boss-level kingdom of California NIMBYs"

Cross the bridge, take a left, and drive out to the national seashore. Have lunch in Pt. Reyes. Drive back out to the 101 through the Nicasio horse country.

Thank you, thank you, Marin County NIMBYs. Thank you.

I don't think most housing advocates want to pave over parks and things like that, but want to add some options where there is already a town.

Also, as kind of an aside, Marin NIMBY's pretty much killed mountain biking in its birthplace, which I also find sad.

Ironically the NIMBY's actions do result in massive loss of wild land, but in someone else's backyard.

If you're ever back in Michigan, you should visit the west side ... and also check out lake Michigan. Grand Rapids isn't as big as Detroit, but our economy is growing at a healthy clip and there's a lot of interesting things going on here.

Actually, I was at ArtPrize this past year. The western coast is beautiful, I got a chance to go to Sleeping Bear and up into the U.P. as well. I'm definitely going to head back there to do some biking.

^ this is true. I was born and raised in south bay area and went to school in Berkeley. The Bay Area is an ecological treasure trove.

But over the years I've seen the hills dotted with houses, untouched swamp land (great for the local wildlife) turned into generic commercial offices, and roads developed deeper into the outskirts. Noise and air pollution is getting worse. Parking and congestion is a nightmare anywhere there are new offices or apartments in old neighborhoods (SF/PA/MV). Public transportation takes hours to get you anywhere (though I'm optimistic about Bart expansions).

I haven't heard anyone in favor of housing development talk about these problems, problems that are bound to get worse if more units are built unless equally aggressive solutions are implemented.

Like others here have said, the Bay Area pressures career-oriented individuals to move here. Although I love the diversity of backgrounds, it is clear that the vast majority of my friends who moved here haven't developed the affinity or interest in non-career-related aspects of the culture/geography. They are not emotionally invested in everything else the bay area has to offer (I theorize that this is because their families and their childhood memories are elsewhere).

I'm not saying new housing shouldn't be built (affording housing for lower-income families/individuals need to be built ASAP). I can't afford rent here either and commit social suicide by choosing to live with my parents despite being in my mid 20s (fortunate enough to have this option). But I can't in good conscience support development in the Bay Area until it comes bundled with discussions on environmental protection, transportation expansion, tax changes (who is going to pay for the extra firefighters/police offers needed if population increases), infrastructure projects (pumping water into the bay, electricity, etc). As of right now, it is so singly-focused on lowering rent that these other issues don't seem to matter in comparison.

I appreciate sama's attempt to get us to call our representatives. As an active voter and lifelong bay area resident, I will do so too.

The point of building infill development in our cities is to not pave over greenfield land on the urban fringe.

The people who have generally opposed dense new housing in the bay seem not to realize that their actions destroy open space and wildlife. It's not like people who can't afford to live in Mountain View are going to kill themselves. They'll just live farther, and farther, and farther out, in hideously damaging single family homes with lawns that gulp water and houses that guzzle electricity to stay cool.

> amazing restaurants

I prefer having friends over and cooking. Restaurants are too impersonal. It is often hard to hear, and they can't be that intimate in nature as you are out in public. There is nothing like eating the meal of a friend or cooking for a friend.

Muir Woods (the setting for the ape's home in the latest Planet of the Apes)

A Planet of The Apes remake? That's the first anchor you reach for?

Muir Woods is the planet Endor!

> Muir Woods is the planet Endor!

True, but in the Planet of the Apes, it's actually supposed to be Muir Woods, so they don't dress it up to look different.

>P.S. I've spent a fair share of time in Detroit/Michigan and the area and as much as I love being able to buy a city block there, I can't live in a place that calls soy sauce on rice "Fried Rice".

While Detroit doesnt have a huge asian population, and thus doesnt have great asian food - it does have huge middle eastern and mexican populations. You can get some of the best mexican, greek, and middle eastern food you'll ever have right in Detroit, as well as Detroit specialty foods like Coney Dogs, Detroit style pizza, and Hani.

Detroit is well regarded for its food, so its surprising for me to see someone disliking that part of the city.

> My cost of living is very cheap. My commute is 15 minutes. I live close to my family. Why should I want to leave?

You shouldn't. If you have a good job in such a location and are happy with the opportunities available, enjoy!

The problem is that markets naturally congregate in distinct locations so anyone who is looking to advance their career needs to make their way to a hub.

I am enjoying my time here. :) I just am a bit anxious because my speciality means there is just one player in the area. Outside of that speciality, there are other attractive, but not my calling, opportunities.

This also complicates my conundrum about whether to continue to rent vs purchasing some property to start some real roots.

Why not work remotely?

I'm hesitant because I have never worked remotely nor studied how to effectively do so. The biggest names in tech (which are interested in my specialty) also seem uninterested in remote workers, even after positive interviews.

Forgive my ignorance but are there biggest names in tech near your place? You should pitch remote work against your local market not the best companies in the world. That said, remote work can be hit or miss. I started working remotely for a company I worked before when my SO had to move for a PhD. We switched countries and I can't wait when we come back, I just miss home. 6 more months and I'm back. I had better and worse periods, overall I'm quite happy I did it but glad to be back in the office soon. In a regular company, when you're one of the few remote workers, you're always THAT remote guy. I guess its much better in companies with robust, mainstream remote culture.

I live in Michigan and work remotely for a company in the bay area. I highly recommend it.

why do we keep clinging to this idea that creative work is somehow "market captureable". Theres almost 0 friction to work for a company in new york or san francisco but somehow being on-prem is this career enhancing move. Why. What does it get you?

Some of the best engineers I know work remote and visit occasionally. Maybe theyre outliers, but we really need to kill this narrative where to be the best you need to live in the valley.

Unfortunately, you don't really move up by being a good engineer. Or, at least, it's very difficult. Some people might pull it off, as specialist contractors or some sort of lucky remote working for remote pay situation. But typically, you have to start force-multiplying -- to borrow military jargon. And that's much harder to do remotely.

If you're a developer, like many here, you can work remotely.

Of course you will have less opportunities that if you're willing to move to Bay Area or NYC, but that's a choice to make. Do you prefer to prioritize on your career completely or are you will to compromise on that for a better living environment for you and your family?

Nobody said it's a obvious choice to live in a smaller city, but it's important to know that (if you're a developer) you have that choice. You can opt out of the rat race and make less, or work on less exciting projects, but still make a decent living.

> If you're a web developer, like many here, you can work remotely.

FTFY, unless there is a trove of non-web remote jobs I have been missing.

For me people trumps nature. I like living in a big international city with a lot of culture, getting to meet a lot of new people all the time. At least not being closed off to those possibilities.

It doesn't have to be SF. It's not just that rent is expensive, it's that for the price you pay you most likely aren't even living in a nice neighborhood (most parts of Mission, parts of Soma, Market, parts of Haight, Divis, most of Western Addition, Lower Nob Hill, etc. - these aren't nice places at all for $3500/ month, which would put you in the very best areas of pretty much any other city in the world).

$3500/mo will buy you a penthouse in some cities.

The beauty with SF is that some of the most beautiful hills and scenery are just a short drive away.

I've been spreading the gospel brother! It's a sad thing that I too often meet folks who have been here for several years (unfortunately many engineers) who look puzzled when I mention Point Reyes or Big Sur. They don't venture too far out of the confines of the city and enjoyed the real reason we pay so much to live here!

Indeed. I recently went to the South Island of New Zealand for some backpacking. It was so beautiful but often I was reminded of marine county, except they don't have alpine parrots in the bay area :p keep up the good work with getting people outside!

However, in those cities you likely wouldn't make the money to afford that $3500/month rent.

I agree.

I think we would make our industry better not by trying to fix Bay Area housing, but by decentralizing it.

That typically means companies should stop forcing their new hires to move to SF/Bay Area, and VC should stop forcing companies they fund to move there too. Same goes with London/Paris for Europe.

I used to live in SV but now I'm in a medium-to-big French city. I'm 20 minutes bike/light rail from downtown but I still live in a house with a garden. I'm also at 5 minutes bike from the forest or shops.

Unfortunately, 7B people who think they are entitled to midwestern living is ecologically disastrous. The responsible ecological future is in density. General misanthropy (or targetted misanthropy, see: white flight) leading to sprawl is a privilege of Americana (hopefully a temporary one). Dense living still means you can get to forests and fields within 20-30 minutes (instead of 10-15 minutes).

Not to mention the economical benefits of dense living when ideas are forced to live next to each other to create new ideas through osmosis [1].

[1]: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XzgMRvQLdXI

You're right, you can't have anything like that in SF. (Well, there are some pretty nice forests nearby.)

You also can't have any of the culture and city life that a major city like SF has. You see easily 10x as many people in a day in SF than you see all week in a semi-rural town in the Midwest. There's 10 cafes within a 10 minute walk. The nightlife is extensive and amazing. The restaurant scene, world class.

And that's fine if it has no value to you. But clearly for many there is more to consider than just cost of living and space. There is a reason startup hubs happen in major cities.

I don't think the nightlife is extensive and amazing in san francisco. Everything closes @9pm and there is nowhere to go!

Um, bars close at 2am? I am hard pressed to think of anywhere, even a restaurant that closes at 9pm.

Certainly "extensive and amazing" is open to debate (can't hold a candle to NYC for example)... but objectively there are vastly more options than a small midwestern city.

I'd like to do this. Unfortunately tech sells itself as remote-friendly when very little of it is.

I have intelligence and programming ability, and a desire to further my career. I want a good high paying job in the epicenter of my chosen industry.

I do not want to move to a city where I can't afford to buy a good home within walking distance of my workplace.

The world should provide this for me.

Well put. You forgot to add that you'd also like a pony and an unlimited supply of Häagen-Dazs.

If others can make a profit providing this for you, why shouldn't they be allowed to?

Maybe there are good answers to that question, but that should be the default.

I really hope you're being sarcastic.

Seconded. Quality of life is second to none.

Pros: * I live the heart of downtown in a major Canadian city * Rent is $1025/mo, plus $100 for underground heated parkin. (Hey it's Canada) * Work is across the street (it's not abused) * Wilderness is only 15-20 minutes away * Montreal/Boston are only 12 hours away

Cons: * I'm a "devops lead" and making $70k/yr

I've come to the realization it'll take six figures plus to get me to move away.

That seems like a very low salary for any technical lead position. Are the wages in Canada generally that low? Most lead positions in the US regardless of geographic area start in the low six figures.

> That seems like a very low salary for any technical lead position. Are the wages in Canada generally that low? Most lead positions in the US regardless of geographic area start in the low six figures.

In the non-coastal, non-major-city US, it's rare for a salary to hit "low six figures".

Wages aren't quite as low as listed for Canada, but most leads here are in the $80-90k range.

Agreed, I was making $70k as new-grad at RIM in Waterloo in 2012. Though when the grandparent says Montreal is 12 hours away, do they mean driving? That would imply they are somewhere like Windsor or Charlottetown.

That said, it could be Vancouver, I remember getting an offer from Arista in 2013 for about $78k + some stock.

Starting salaries for new graduates in SF are north of $100k. Those "six figures plus" are certainly on the table.

Certainly good points, but one of the unique things about the Bay Area,especially compared to the east coast megalopolis, is that you can also be in the wilderness in 15-30 minutes.

Yes, but many young people like myself do not. Ok, I'm not so young now, I am 30. Still, I could not wait to leave my mid-size sunburn hell of hole of a city. In my mid twenties I did move to a west coast tech hub. Best decision I ever made.

If you like where you are, then you should definitely stay there.

Sounds like life here in Bend, Oregon (where we have some nice mountains, to boot). The same housing situation as SF is playing out though: it's becoming prohibitively expensive for middle class people like teachers and firefighters because not enough housing is being built.

Usually you don't have a lot of career opportunity in these kind of places. Opportunities are in the cities.

Yup, thus part of the angst about relocating or not!

I like it, too, and built a valley-style VC-backed startup here. Really, the only people who can understand why Midwesterners like it here are Midwesterners, and in that category even it's people with family/homeowners/etc.

I used to take it personally when people would look down on any other non-SF locales, especially the Midwest. Now I realize that they just don't know what they're talking about, and that's okay, they don't need to. I've already used the advantages of our location to compete on hiring with talent that does get it, and I'm happy to keep doing that!

I think it's more likely that many of the people know what they are talking about (plenty of the people I've seen talk down about the Midwest are in the group you say understand it -- people who were homeowners and/or has families in the Midwest) and just don't share your preferences.

Why is it so hard for people to accept that not everyone wants the same thing, so that any disagreement offer preferences must be grounded in someone's ignorance?

The only reason I live in an apartment in an urban area is because I have to. The minute I get the financial ability to do so, I am moving. I like privacy, nature, real communities, space, etc. None of these things are available where I live.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com