Hacker News Reader

Comment by anon374939 | Hacker News Reader

After two years in San Francisco, I had to move back to my small(er) home town city because I ultimately realized there's little to no future for me in a city like San Francisco, despite making 250k/yr. I'd have to make at minimum $1M per year for a similar lifestyle (and even then, the stress of living in the bay area will reduce years from your lifespan... what's each year of your life worth to you?).

View on HN

You "need" to make $1.5M/year for "similar" lifestyle. Maybe you should either reconsider your lifestyle or your math skills.

note: I made the assumption you didn't move to a village in a 3rd world country.

You're right. The point still stands. The difference is further reduced after taxes (you'd be paying over 50% in California taxes on that high of an income). I moved to a very normal and beautiful suburb in the USA close to a big city (Boston, Chi, DC, take your pick)

This post is hilarious. You're the embodiment of HN.

Yeah, first world problem I know :)

Everything's a matter of perspective. Ultimately I want my future kids to have a quality of life similar or greater than I had growing up, and I just didn't think that would be possible in the Bay (at least not without taking on the much higher stress that would likely accompany a much higher income)

Curious as to what was causing the stress specific to the Bay Area for you?

Most activities seemed at least 2x more difficult, and that differential probably becomes 3x with kids. Service all around isn't very good in the Bay, there is a higher chance of simple things to not go as planned. Over the years I've realized that stress is something that creeps up on you slowly but surely, and most often you don't even realize it. Over the years it adds up, and ultimately can reduce your lifespan. It truly is the silent killer.

Can you elaborate a little more on the activities here being 2x more difficult? I'm curious because this is a metric I use when comparing quality of life between NYC and SF (I made the move about a year ago). Activities like laundry, grocery shopping, and commuting I find easier in SF than in NYC, even though some of the salient variables haven't changed much (e.g. in both cities I don't have in-unit laundry so I go to the closest laundromat).

Not to say things aren't harder here than in most places. Just having in-unit laundry seems like something most non high-COL, urban-dwelling Americans take as a given.

NYC seems to be on par with SF. Both living situations are extreme for someone with a more suburban upbringing.

Lack of mobility if you don't have a car, lack of available parking if you do, long lines in general, lots of traffic. Very poor care at many establishments due to overworked and over stressed staff. Miniscule and generally not so great living conditions. For example I lived in a nearly 100 year old house in Oakland with others, which 1 yr later found out had mold problems (a serious health hazard). Also lived in two very modern apartments in the heart of SF both of which had a converted living room bedroom with three roommates. One roommate slept on a couch for a year, paying over $1000/mo. Crime due to homeless situation (witnessed crime frequently during my time, petty crime especially. Side note, didn't a Bart train get robbed just yesterday?). Medical care is another big one (multiple experiences, one for me personally)

Even little things like cooking are very difficult when your entire kitchen is 1/5 the size of what you'd find in a similarly priced suburban home. Little things like this add to stress as I wrote a bit about already.

And sadly the south bay isn't that much better as a "suburb". The home prices in Palo Alto for example are quite outrageous. There are a lot of far nicer suburbs in other parts of the country without the wild price tag.

I was young when I moved, and don't regret the time I spent in the Bay at all. I learned a lot, it was positive for my career and most of all I just had to get it out of my system. The glitz and glamour of it all wore with time, as I suspect it does for many, and ultimately I felt it wasn't where I would want to build my future.

Because you asked: Actually, I'm happy to give up a year or two of my lifespan in exchange for a much more urban lifestyle in a place a lot of our (wife and I) friends live. Assuming a regular lifespan somewhere into the 70s or so. I'd die earlier of boredom in a small town (I'm from one in India). Of course I might feel another way in ten years.

When I was driving to work, I felt that the stress would give me chronic stress issues, or make me drop dead one day at 40. That I am not ok with.

Yeah, I couldn't live in a small town either. Its important to note though that Boston, Chicago, Philly or any number large metros are actually quite larger than San Francisco and have more vibrant downtowns with much more affordable suburbs. Agree that having friends and family around can make all the difference. Driving indeed can be stressful, my work happens to be just 10 min from home and I'm a 30 min drive away from a great city. After making the move I do feel like I have the best of both worlds... relaxed and low stress suburban lifestyle with a massive and vibrant urban center nearby. I've also found that the fiscally conservative and low stress lifestyle is more conducive to travel, which I've been able to do a lot more often now (being in the East coast probably helps too, with lots of major cities just a short flight away)

I was going to disagree with a bunch of things you said about the cities you mentioned, but I liked your last two lines! You seem to be happy, so it doesn't really matter why, I guess. I hope that continues being the case.

what were you doing/where were you working that you were pulling in 250k?

I prefer not to say exactly, but it was multiple sources of income from different small businesses I've built over the years.

That's obviously completely fair, and I appreciate you replying at all. I guess I took it as you were working for a single company and not a proprietor in any way. So that was (false) context I injected, and that's on me.

Is 250k considered unusual in the bay area for a BigCo for someone for someone 3-5 years out of college? If that's the case, choosing to living in SF is even crazier than I thought.

Yes, that's unusual. Think half that for someone only a few years out of college. And that's for software dev at a large company. The vast majority of employed people in the Bay Area do not make six figures (source: I've lived here for several decades).

As someone in the bay area working for a BigCo, I expect to be making making ~250k with 5 years of experience due to internal info, see also https://danluu.com/startup-tradeoffs/

That seems a bit high-ish for that year range but achievable at BigCo (if you negotiate savvy).

Where did you go?

Reply on news.ycombinator.com