There are a ton of other scenarios where you earn and save a lot more in a city like SF.
I have roommates for example and my rent is pretty cheap. I also don’t have a car - I just use Uber or Lyft. Saves a ton of money.
Most people I know under 40 in the UK use supermarket delivery. Ordering once a week takes about 20 mins, delivered more or less when you want to the nearest hour.
The US is the one that's behind and if I were to take a guess, it's the suburban sprawl that makes last-mile delivery prohibitive in many parts of the mid-west, etc.
But you wouldn't go to live in Japan and expect a 2 story house with a backyard, and space to keep 3 Ford F-150s in a garage would you? In the same way, the entire lifestyle of living in SF/NYC is completely different than living elsewhere. Why use the same metrics to compare the very different lifestyles without taking into account that they are in fact different and can't so easily be compared?
You must be willing to make adjustments to your lifestyle. If you are not willing to do this and you only compare different places against what's familiar - then just stay where you're comfortable - you'll never be happy anywhere else.
I'm lucky enough to have lived in many many different types of environments throughout my life and I see the value in all of them.
By the way, for what it's worth I love my current roommates - I much prefer living with them to living alone.
If I need large ticket items from Costco, I have them delivered through Instacart or Amazon Fresh and that will last me a month or more because I buy in bulk.
I also split the Instacart delivery cost with my roommates often so it ends up being nothing.
And even if I did Uber to Whole Foods and back - I would split the cost with at least one of my roommates who probably also need groceries. Even if I go by myself, I would much rather do this than own a car and pay for insurance, repairs, maintenance, gas and the general headache of owning a large depreciating object. Seriously, Uber to Whole Foods or Costco is like $5.
I'm not knocking people who make the choice to do that but don't delude yourself; on a purly financial basis it is not a rational choice.
If I have a significant other who is also a high earner, then ironically both of our cost of living will go down because of things like splitting rent, splitting groceries, making food at home (easier to shop groceries for 2+ people). A dual income household in SF with good career trajectories can easily put you in the half-a-mil a year range.
It's the kids that make this infinitely more difficult. At that point I'd probably consider moving to a lower COL place. But I'm not sure I want kids - that's a decision for later.
As much as people love to knock on SF, I have a great life here and so do so many others. It's absolutely possible if you're a decent software engineer which is the lens through which I write this comment. Obviously if you're making $60k a year in a commoditized career, you're going to have a bad time. Also if home ownership is that important to you for some reason, then SF probably isn't the place for you either.
I have friends who live in Baltimore and make over $200k+ as software engineers. One guy likes to be thrifty so he bought a house for $150k because it was cheaper than renting. You can't tell me that he would be better off in SF. He would need to be making over $300k to be in a similar financial position. No Startup is going to pay him that kind of money.
I agree the weather is often nice and I love visiting SF but that's a non financial reason.
If he values home ownership, then Baltimore is much better situation for him for sure. If he doesn't, then it becomes much more of a tossup at that point and more variables come into play.