Why I Chose New York
michael-g-miller.tumblr.com
michael-g-miller.tumblr.com
I live in an 1840's house that I love. I walk seven minutes to main street (and work) every day. I live a mere hour from the mountains, the ocean, boston, minutes from country. I don't have any wants, I just like programming and reading and making things. I live a simple life, I like to think.
Yet I get an email from a recruiter once a week (or a little less often, some more personal invitation) who are thrilled to talk to me until the point that they find that I have no intention of leaving New Hampshire.
Willingness to uproot one's entire life and move (to Silicon Valley), it seems, is a foregone conclusion to them and I never cease to astonish my correspondents by not wanting to go there.
I don't begrudge them. But I don't understand why in the grand game of chess I would exchange 23 years of life for a single job.
(At last one correspondent signed, "let me know if you ever decide to head west, young man :-)")
Ursa Minor Beta is, some say, one of the most appalling places in the known Universe.
Although it is excruciatingly rich, horrifyingly sunny and more full of wonderfully exciting people than a pomegranate is of pips, it can hardly be insignificant that when a recent edition of Playbeing magazine headlined an article with the words "When you are tired of Ursa Minor Beta you are tired of life", the suicide rate quadrupled overnight.
(from "The Restaurant at the End of the Universe")
Back in 1994, I bought a three-bedroom townhouse for $45,000; during the dot-com boom, I realized that moving to Cali would mean living in a refrigerator box with six other people. These days, I'm paying (half of) a $1600/month mortgage on a house on 1.5 acres on the shore of the Tennessee river.
It continually surprises me how many folks make it out to Austin for SXSW each year, and yet still go back to California. As a native Texan and Mexican food addict, I found the lack of great food options in Norcal lacking. :)
(disclaimer: I actually live in Dallas, which is a nice city, just not as nice as Austin)
NYC has so many women. Beautiful women. But if you're looking to have kids, settle down and move away to where your kid has his own lawn to play on, your odds drop close to zero. So many people date in NYC, so few commit for the rest of their lives. I was so naive when I moved there at 26, I thought I would be married within a year. All my friends had gotten married while still in college. NYC just ain't the place.
Lack of a commute? Yes, but add in the time to get everywhere else. That party in Brooklyn? An hour. Finding somewhere, anywhere, where buildings don't dot the horizon and you feel at peace? Try a few hours. Enjoy the subway construction my friend.
I will say that NYC kills when it comes to food. Its the best, unless you're trying to find a nice cheap bratwurst, then NYC sucks it up big time. But the Midwest makes up for it. I have a canoe, a giant deck bigger than my NYC apt with a grill on it and streets that get plowed. Midwest, I think you win.
I'm 28, and I still don't want to get married. I have no problem with buildings dotting the horizon (when I want to leave the city, I fly away somewhere far, far away. Or go to Prospect Park). So, I probably wouldn't care too much for the Midwest. Everyone is different.
Hey, we have Chicago in the midwest you know. I'd wager more people here, as a percentage, live in skyscrapers than do in lower Manhattan.
You just made that up.
http://maps.google.com/maps/place?q=wechslers+currywurst&...
You don't have to answer this highly personal question, of course! It's just that it's likely I'm moving to NYC for my next job, and I'm interested in the prospects.
I've found that to be the case in the SF area, as well. A (female) friend moved out to DC. She was shocked at how female acquaintances behaved there. She relayed their statements like, "well, yeah, Larry has some anger problems when he's drinking, but he's a good man." Our shared opinion was that SF suffers from grass-is-always-greener syndrome, where people have been presented with so many options for so long, that they come to believe there is always something (or someone) better to be had.
As always, YMMV, and I can only speak from the experiences of myself and my pool of friends.
Don't be fooled into thinking that SV will be the saviour of your dreams (the guy living out of his car comes to mind), but also don't think that NYC is an instant shortcut to making it big. I'm in New York and I wouldn't have it any other way. But I'm just one person.
[1] I think these arguments are always worse because of the time difference. As I write this, it's 10am here in NYC and the thread is 100% New Yorkers. In three hours time Californians will start logging in and be horrified at the overwhelmingly one-sided view, and start responding.
I also don't buy your SF commute argument. There are tons of startups in downtown SF. You don't have to live in the bay area and work in the valley. If I were to move out there I'd live and work in SF, I wouldn't even consider SV.
Previously, I thought Gowalla was the only somewhat known startup in Austin, but they sold to Facebook. Are there any other somewhat known startups in Austin?
I moved here from the Bay Area (with a 2-year stay in San Diego in the middle) and I'm really happy with the quality of life and the tech community here in Austin. I can buy a house and live comfortably here, and the taxes are far cheaper--important when you really start earning money!
The one you started. Nothing else matters.
Austin feels like a "mini-Bay Area" to me. I didn't want to start my next company in the bubble, especially since we're working with a lot of "oldschool" businesses. Austin is booming, but things are still relatively inexpensive here, and there are plenty of customers. Plus, we found an amazing Python developer here--I'm not sure that would have been as possible in the Bay Area.
I'm still willing to travel to the Bay Area; I just don't want to live there again.
On the other hand, my attempt at a point was that once you've started your business, you have to focus on it. Suddenly all that other innovation around you stops being opportunities and starts being distractions. If anyone says to you, "What you're doing is stupid, you should be doing what those guys over there are doing," you probably shouldn't listen to them. The last thing you need to be doing is chasing instead of being chased.
"The bubble" is a really good way to describe it.
1. I'm from the NYC area, and have a lot of friends who will be living there. I also have a lot of friends in Silicon Valley. I don't know too many people who are sticking around in Austin. While it wouldn't be the end of the world to live in a place where I didn't know a ton of people, I'd prefer to live in a place where I have a preexisting friend group. Plus, I went to college for four years here; Austin is great, but after 4 years, I need a change of pace.
2. NYC is arguably the 2nd best city for tech(behind Silicon Valley). With Bloomberg's initiative to start a tech-centric campus on Roosevelt island, and the recent influx of big tech companies (Facebook, Google, Twitter, Palantir, etc.), it's becoming a very hot city for tech in a very short period of time.
Austin, Boston, Boulder, Seattle, or Portland are all towns where one can settle down and raise a family without having to settle for a corporate 9-5 gig since there's vibrant startup/tech communities in these cities too. The option is always there and is especially attractive once you've got the Bay Area or NYC experience under your belt.
Ultimately, I can afford this because Google pays me a lot of money and buys me three meals a day. But if you are bootstrapping a startup, you probably don't have this much money to burn, and there's really no compelling reason to live in NYC unless you spend all your time doing social things. If you're programming, buy yourself a more comfortable apartment in Kansas City, or something. $2400 a month buys you the entire city :)
Given, the tech scene in LA isn't great but it's not that far from SF and there are definitely some hackers around UCLA and the Westside.
I love New Yorkers but New York City is a zoo. You're constantly fighting the crowds, the street noise, and there is an extremely high cost of living. Some people thrive in this environment. I however find that my blood pressure rises to unacceptable levels.
In Los Angeles I know plenty of people with a yard and driveway living in nice walkable neighborhoods near the beach or in and around hollywood paying less than $1500-$1700/month.
The sprawl isn't as much of a factor as some might imagine. You tend to stay within 10-15 miles of home anyway, so it doesn't matter that there's another 50-60 miles of sprawl beyond that. Besides, it's not like SV is sprawl-free.
LA is much bigger than SF, and that's mostly a benefit. More options for most everything.
As far as dating, just avoid anyone in any way connected to entertainment and it's fine. I'm sort of kidding. Sort of not.
It's cheaper than SV, for sure. Though the upper end can compete with the upper end of SF as well. It's a city where you can spend as much as you'd like, there's not really a ceiling.
Los Angeles gets a bad rap culturally, but in reality it's second only to New York in just about any cultural way you'd care to name. There's a LOT of creative people here in just about every creative arena.
One thing I really like about LA is that there's probably more people trying to live their wildest dreams than anywhere else on earth. I think that's admirable.
Biggest downside? Weather. I hate the lack of rain. Something I hear a lot from people who are from elsewhere. Summers are quite tedious.
I consistently meet people in their late 20's and early 30's who are serious players in a wide variety of business and artistic endeavors. I don't have to go more than one degree of separation to find someone at the top of any field. I know less entrepreneurs here than in SV, but the cross-pollination in NYC is a big deal.
It's like a new blacksmith coming into town and complaining that there aren't any trained blacksmiths for him to hire, while staring at 50 strong farmboys who are holding up "will work for food" signs.
If only there was some way of teaching people new skills... but alas, no such thing exists.
Yeah, well.. those are the untalented ones. Not everyone can do every job. Especially in technology. Sorry.
It's hard to find good auto mechanics, too. And electricians, and true salespeople. And anything that requires skills and talent and practice and learning. This is really just a perennial truism, not anything specific to today.
It's the other way around. If those farmboys you postulate don't have the initiative and aptitude to take up hacking, they're unlikely to be a great addition to a software team. The last thing you need is someone passively waiting to be told what to do and taught how to do it.
It would be great to be proven wrong about this, but I've seen lots of examples of it being a problem and not one counterexample.
If mainstream culture changes to one in which the idea of doing this work and being excited by it and making things with it becomes widespread, then one might see significant growth in the talent pool. If more creative sparks are flying around, the chance of one of your farmboys catching fire is greater. But that's a longer-term process. To become good at this stuff, people don't need training - they need inspiration.
I moved to NYC and started job-hunting in early 2011. I didn't have a background in software development but I had programmed in VBA for 18 months (pricing insurance), used R for my statistics masters degree project and had been dabbling in Python for around 5 years (all self-taught).
Through direct applications, headhunters and networking at various meetup events I hunted for tech and tech/finance jobs for about eight months. While things would sometimes look promising, if usually came down to "we're really looking for someone with a bit more experience in X". I did manage to find some freelance work (for a Python/Django web startup) but they decided that rather than another backend programmer they needed someone who could do frontend development and system administration...
After leaving NYC my sister got a call, "is your brother still looking for a job in New York?", and I ended up back here working as an accountant. I didn't have any experience in accounting either (though I had taken some classes in the past) but my new boss was happy to bring me in on a three month contract and see how things worked out (I got a permanent offer after a month and a half).
But you may have missed my point by a couple degrees. It wasn't that companies should look at initiative and aptitude directly. It's that those are the things that drive you to acquire the skills that make you good. Then you can prove that you're good.
How exactly to prove you're good, or for companies to tell who's good, is a billion (trillion?) dollar question that's in flux right now. But clearly it has more to do with showing work and less with weak proxies like years of experience (which may be years of doing things badly) or resumes (a skill uncorrelated if not inversely correlated with good programming). Since startups are starved for good hackers, somebody's going to figure this out, gain a huge edge, and pave the way for the rest.
In the meantime, training/retraining programs are not going to increase the talent pool much. Something fresh like Hacker School might, though.
Edit: in my opinion the eventual answer is going to be found by reasoning backward from Christopher Alexander's great question, "What feels more alive?" But obviously that isn't much help to someone in the situation you describe right now. So how did it work out? Do you like accounting or would you rather be programming?
Ultimately I'd rather be programming. My current job is OK and I'll stick at it for now, I owe my boss for taking a chance on me and they'd struggle if I left before the end of the year (we are a small team and in the middle of switching accounting systems and finalizing an acquisition). I do like the fact that I get exposed to a range of business issues, as my previous job in the insurance industry was a little more technical but very narrow in scope. Long-term it probably doesn't suit me (though it might be different at another company), I've automated some tasks in Access/VBA but there is a line between finance and IT (partially outsourced or contractors) and I'm expected to use systems rather than improve them. At least I can at least work on some longer-term programing projects in my free time, but it's frustrating to be left thinking "maybe next year", rather than living in the moment!
The best part about finding early stage talent in SV is that everyone is earning their real world MBA the hard way, and when they succeed or fail at their venture they are going to be frighteningly well equipped to help you with yours.
When we were first shown the building, all I noticed was that the walls of the elevator were covered in graffiti! The very picture of urban blight.
A couple of months after we moved in, I took a moment to actually read the graffiti: "Bach!", "Ravel", "Beethoven sucks!", "Tchaikovsky 4 eva", and so on. Turns out, we live 2 blocks from the Manhattan school of music.
We'd often get into debates about this. My argument is that it is cheaper to live in New York than the Bay Area. The main reason for this is that almost anywhere you live in the Bay Area you will have a car. Between car payment, insurance, gas and maintenance you will more than make up for any difference in rent.
Your only real option to living without a car is to live in SF. That means an hour commute minimum each way every day (on the bus). Sometimes it can double with traffic on the 101. You have to catch them when they're running (4-6 times in the morning and evening?). Or if you don't have a bus option it's Caltrain + bus. Caltrain runs every hour during the day (slightly more often in peak hours).
Even if your bus has wifi and you can allegedly do work I'd rather not waste 2-3 hours of my life on it each day.
Compare this to New York. Areas around the office (Chelsea, Meatpacking, West/Greenwich Village, Union Square) are expensive but I still have a second story (true) one bedroom walkup 7 minutes walk from work for $2000/month.
A friend lives in Crown Heights in Brooklyn. Door to door will typically take him ~35 minutes. His one bedroom is $1000/month. How far afield are you going to have to go in SV to find a one bedroom for that price (or, worse, that price including the car cost, even adjusting for spending $100/month on a monthly metro card).
And I'd much rather rely on the Subway (or the commuter trains for that matter) than anything in Norcal (although I found the combination of BART + buses fine in SF even though I knew many people who complained about them). It's like $2.25 to go anywhere in the city and it runs 24x7.
Rent in Manhattan is certainly expensive but you don't need to live in Manhattan. You can choose to (as I have) but you don't need to. You can get a pretty nice apartment in Forest Hills and have a relatively easy run in on the E train if you wish. Williamsburg is full of hipsters but is convenient (except when the L train stops running, which seems to happen all too often).
So rent aside, everything else is the same cost of cheaper. Food especially is cheaper. A Thai restaurant around the corner has $2-6 appetizer and <$10 entrees. A Malaysian place I like in Chinatown has ~$7 entrees. Why anyone cooks in this city is beyond me.
On the way to work there are 3-4 laundromats. The one I go to is open from 7am-11pm 7 days a week and as long as I get them my clothes before about 1-2pm will have them back the same day, washed, dried, folded and sealed for <$1/lb.
If you have a family you can stay in the city (expensive) or move to the commuter belt (as most people do). Long Island, upstate NY or NJ (or further afield at places like CT, PA) have good affordable options. If you're married and have kids you'll probably only need 1 car rather than 2 (since the trains will cover you during the week to go to work).
New York really is great. Although if I weren't working for Google I'm not sure who I'd want to work for. Foursquare? Maybe but you're essentially banking on them getting bought out (admittedly, this seems fairly likely). Tumblr? Maybe. Amazon? I think they're out of the city somewhere. Palantir? Maybe. SV certainly has got way more choice.
Your startup could also be in SF (not MV) saving you the commute, have you thought about that?
Eating fast food <$7 will quickly make you feel pretty unhealthy in NY. All that greasy pizza and chinese food. You're also not conveniently not including tax (which is high in NY) and tip. Real sustainable eating will cost double that in NY.
Good, healthy, cheap food in SF is pretty common, it's the lifestyle there.
> Door to door will typically take him ~35 minutes.
Bull. Maybe if he jumps out of his building, sprints to the stop, and the subway car just happens to be waiting for him the moment you get there. The fact is that if you work late into the night, the cars come less frequently, especially to/from places outside of Manhattan. You have to factor in average wait time (since NY Subways still don't track subway cars like any other good transit system). My closest subway stops would also be closed for days or weeks at a time randomly for upkeep. Don't forget that, during rush hour, you stand in a sardine can with a hundred other people.
Also, NY culture is a consumption culture. Even if you can possibly scrape by with less, you're in a culture that actively goes out and pays huge amounts for drinks at bars, measures class by where you live and places you shop, and you'll invariable end up paying some or a lot of money for cabs because of closed subway routes or maybe you just get sick of the dirty, cold subway.
I've done startups in both areas for years. I notice that people in New York justify the low quality of life by claiming the best possible aspect of something is the norm. It's not the norm. 35 minute commutes from Brooklyn, $2-$6 appetizers (who measures food costs in terms of appetizers??). $1000/mo one-bedrooms and 7-minute commutes have 0 correlation in NY.
For cultural comparisons here's what you get in Central London for similar prices. (No adjustments for cost of living.)
(http://www.findaproperty.com/to-rent/central-london/properti...)
It's irrelevant if the midwest is cheaper. The tech centers have the jobs and the higher rents. (SF, Boston, NYC, Seattle, Austin, NC)
http://www.google.com/intl/en/jobs/uslocations/madison/swe/i...
Edit: Also, it should be noted that the dating scene in NYC is ridiculously nice for single men with good jobs.
However if you measure quality of life by the cleanliness of the subway or having to wait 15 minutes because you just missed the last F train or it annoys you that a lot of people commute during rush hour, then yeah, NYC probably isn't for you.
Your knock on consumption culture is overstated. I guess if you want to get a meal or have a drink in the same places that finance and law douches do, you are going to run into that, but that's your fault for not taking a look around and realizing there is so much more to be had in this city.
[edited: underestimated the commute time to SOHO]
SF is definitely cheaper but not that much cheaper. I have friends who share a 2 bedroom for $2400 not far from Golden Gate Park in a shitty apartment. I can find any number of shitty apartments for $2400 in the city if I want.
Another point: you earn higher salaries in New York than less urban areas (this is true of SF too). If I earned even $30,000 less and lived in the Midwest, financially speaking I'd be worse off. It may even be $20,000.
> Eating fast food <$7
Who said anything about fast food?
> Bull...
During the day, that's the time. Out of hours trains are less frequent but isn't that kinda the point: they're still running. Caltrain stops at about 11. Not sure when the muni-buses and BART stop.
> Also, NY culture is a consumption culture.
Nonsense. Or, rather, only if you want it to be. If you want to keep up with the investment banker set, then that's your choice. If you want to go to expensive bars and drop $100-200 on drinks, that's your choice. You're able to do that in any number of major urban centers.
I don't feel the need to go down Fifth Avenue and do my shopping at Prada or Bergdorf Goodman (Gap/Old Navy/Urban Outfitters are just fine with me). If you do, that's your choice.
A friend of mine once took us to a noodle bar off Union Square. The music and noise was so loud you could barely hear yourself think. Me and a friend said "screw this" and went somewhere else. Later he was like "you have to put up with waiting and noise". No, you don't. If you want to hang out at the hipster joints, then sure. But again, that's a choice.
I find this with New York (and London) in particular: you either decide to like it or you don't. If you've decided not to like it, you'll notice certain streets smell like urine, the garbage smells, homeless people on the subway, homeless people defecating in trash cans or urinating in phone boots, the lack of space and so on. But that really is just a state of mind.
I know people who are addicted to their large houses, having a back yard, their cars, etc and look past their long commutes, the costs of car ownership and so on. That too is a choice.
Your post comes across as very bitter. You've decided to not like New York. You probably have your reasons. Fair enough. That's your choice. But in no way are you presenting anything remotely objective about New York.
> "$2000 apartment which is an insane amount to pay for housing."
SF is at the same level now. A solid 1BR in the city proper (as opposed to say, out in Outer Richmond) will easily hit $2000. And beyond. New construction (SOMA) would be closer to $3-4K. This is in the same range as what both dev_jim and cletus claim.
> "BART stations are much cleaner than NYC subway stations, I find the trips much more pleasant."
Being someone who commutes on BART daily, no, they're really not. MTA stations are older and slightly more run-down looking, but cleanliness-wise, they're about the same. The interesting thing is that MTA subway trains are considerably cleaner than any BART train.
Hell, if we're going to talk about general city cleanliness - just about any sidewalk in Manhattan is much, much cleaner than any sidewalk in SF. I don't know about you, but I've never had to dodge human excrement in NYC, whereas it seems to be a semi-frequent occurrence here in the City.
> "Eating fast food <$7 will quickly make you feel pretty unhealthy in NY. All that greasy pizza and chinese food."
As opposed to greasy Chinese food in the Sunset? Burritos in the Mission? The food scene between the two cities are not too different - both NYC and SF have a lot of cheap, good-for-you food if you know where to find it. Both cities also have a whole lot of greasy stuff-that-will-kill-you food that's just as easily accessible. If you think eating cheaply in NYC necessitates pizza and Chinese takeout, you're sorely mistaken, just as you would be mistaken if you thinking burritos are a necessary food in SF.
> "The fact is that if you work late into the night, the cars come less frequently"
This is true in SF also. Live in Oakland and work in the city? Welp, you're fucked, frequently. BART also shuts down at midnight, which puts you in a SOL position a lot more often than it would be in NYC. I've talked to numerous cabbies/Uber drivers who laugh at the idea of doing an East Bay run on a busy night. You can't even find a cab to drive you across the bridge at exorbitant rates! :P
> "Don't forget that, during rush hour, you stand in a sardine can with a hundred other people."
Hop on a BART car at rush hour. Or worse, hop on a MUNI train at rush hour in one of the downtown stations - I've been on a NY subway car during rush, it's actually marginally emptier than, say, the N-Judah at rush.
> "$1000/mo one-bedrooms"
Have you looked at SF housing prices lately? You can't even find a studio in the Tenderloin for $1K.
@cletus was right about the job scene though. Most tech companies HQ are in SF and there's a wealth of jobs. NYC's tech scene is still up and coming. As we've seen with Austin , Seattle, and NC/Research Triangle, "up and coming" can last for a long, long time.
Apples to oranges. BART is commuter rail, not transit. Compare BART to Metro North, New Jersey Transit, and the LIRR. NYCT's equivalent is Muni. (My experience is that Muni is pretty clean. But it's often faster to walk than to take Muni.)
Maybe if he jumps out of his building, sprints to the stop, and the subway car just happens to be waiting for him the moment you get there.
Trains on the same tracks run every 2:30 during rush hour. (If you are at a local/express station, then you get a train every minute.)
You have to factor in average wait time (since NY Subways still don't track subway cars like any other good transit system).
All the IRT lines do, as do the B-division lines that have been converted to communication-based train control. Admittedly, you have to be at the station to see the next-train times, which is annoying. But the trains actually do run close to their schedule. (Lately, I've been going home on the train that claims to be at 14th St. at 1:39AM. I've never waited more than four minutes past this time.)
Some of the B-division stations give you an idea of when the next train will come: announcements like "An uptown express train is now at W 4th St."
Even if you can possibly scrape by with less, you're in a culture that actively goes out and pays huge amounts for drinks at bars, measures class by where you live and places you shop
All people are judging you because of the possessions you choose to display. True in New York, true in San Francisco. The only way to overcome it is to not care. If you work for Goldman Sachs then there is probably some culture of pretending to be wealthy. At Google NYC, not so much.
and you'll invariable end up paying some or a lot of money for cabs because of closed subway routes or maybe you just get sick of the dirty, cold subway.
The subway seems about as clean as any other subway in the US. A $2.50 subway ticket buys a lot less cleaning than a $15 commuter rail ticket. Live in the suburbs if everything has to have the appearance of cleanliness. (Manhattan is a lot dirtier than Chicago, though. It's because there's no space for alleys to hide the garbage in.)
There's an area of about 6 city blocks bordered by Columbia University on the south, 125th St. on the north, Broadway to the east, and Grant's Tomb on the west...and rent is ridiculously cheap! 2BR for $2700 or less (we're paying much less) are not unusual. The 125th St. 1 train stop is right there. I can be in Union Sq. in about 20 min during rush hour, and I can walk to Columbia and most of the UWS. On top of that, if you head to 125th St. and walk toward the water, you've got Dinosaur BBQ and a giant Fairway right there. If you're the biking type, you can go from there straight down the West-side Greenway. Add to all this the fact that Columbia is building their new campus just across 125th St., and you have a little slice of heaven.
Now, most people look at a map and immediately say, "But you're in Harlem!" Well, technically Harlem starts just north of my bedroom window, but yeah...so what? New York is a bit of a peculiar place. I used to live further north in Harlem, and there were literally patches of no more than 4 blocks square where life was perfect, and I never felt I was in any danger. Go another 2 blocks north, though, and you started to feel like you had to watch your back.
If you are going to move to New York, your best bet is to talk to someone who knows New York (hint: if they've lived in New York for less than 5 years, they probably don't know New York).
Anywhere that's a discrete suburb (preferably cut off from where decent people live by a bridge or railway crossing) takes a long time to go from "slum" to "trendy" in the eyes of most people, despite it actually being a nice place to live. But everyone who is in on the secret gets outrageously cheap rent, a great place to buy, and funny looks from co-workers.
Another tip for prospective New Yorkers: find out where filming permits are being issued. Film crews will stay away from the overly expensive (stuck-up-ish, NIMBY-ish) neighborhoods, but they also won't go anywhere overly risky. As a nice added bonus, typically the area will be picturesque (though not always).
For example: "Person of Interest" was filming in front of our building on Monday, episodes of "Blue Bloods" and "Gossip Girl" have filmed within a couple blocks, and the outdoor scenes at the end of Lady Gaga's video for "Marry the Night" were shot right by the Fairway 3 blocks away.
So talk to me. I grew up and live here. And your best bet is actually NJ. Hoboken or Jersey City. They're on the PATH. Your commute to Manhattan will be 15 minutes and a ticket costs $2. Less if you buy in bulk or get a pass.
Also, you pay less in taxes (income and sales tax) since you're in NJ.
If you live in NJ but work in NY don't you pay NY taxes? And even if you want to get around that somehow, won't any normal employer payroll withhold for NY before you even see it?
Stuyvesant Town may be the biggest real-estate default in American history but it is really really nice. We have our own reading rooms, movie shows, ice-skating in winter, gym, 24-hours security with video, etc. It's just worth checking out the website http://www.stuytown.com/.
Disclaimer: I live here with roommates but have no other affiliation with Stuyvesant Town.
Anyway, the west side of Harlem, the other side of Morningside Park, has gentrified significantly in the last 20 years and is also by all accounts a pretty nice place to live nowadays.
Washington Heights is also "up-and-coming", up north of there.
Places like: Prospect Heights (A,C,2,3), Long Island City (7,N,R,Q,E,M,F), Lefferts Garden (Q,B,2,5), Astoria (N,Q), and Woodside/Jackson Heights (7,M,R & LIRR).
You may not be able to find a place to buy $6 PBRs or $5 coffees right around the corner, but I consider that a plus.
Now, if you would like to innovate, and be part of something big, your chances of realizing those are very slim if you live outside the big magnets. SV, New York, Boston are fine but the opportunities diminish very fast as the density of tech companies gets smaller. There are interesting exceptions though. For instance the Raleigh-Durham area has a good combination of schools (fresh talent), and tech companies. If you are at that point in your life that you need to choose where you will pick a home, think carefully, and do your research.
Being totally self-promotional here, but I just made a video about moving to New York for a startup. Please don't take it seriously.
Different mindset of people in NYC than in SF (compare NYC's finance and fashion industries to SF's technology industry)...
Better logistics in NYC than in SF (in NYC: 24/7 public transport, plenty of taxis, no car culture, and apartments nearby; in SF: BART isn't 24/7, taxis scarcer, many have their own vehicles, and people live farther)...
What else?
The reason I left NYC was that it didn't have a vibe for "technology for technology's sake." If you're a more low-level engineer (knee-deep in circuits and C) then NYC is really going to push against you; the opportunities are fewer and the culture surrounding you values that less than financial sales or 'hustling' (Adafruit being a counterexample). You'd have to specifically hang out around Columbia, drive upstate, or grab the Fung Wah to Boston to get that kind of vibe. In the Bay you're immersed in it.
I've lived in NJ and commuted to Manhattan for essentially my entire professional life, and quite satisfied with it. I currently commute by ferry which is insanely pleasant compared to a subway.
There is no best place to live. There is just the best place to live for you right now.
New York will always have a special place in my heart as I grew up in lower part of brooklyn until I moved to Jersey in 7th grade. It was one of the greatest times of my life. I only returned to the city after I graduated college two years ago. Maybe it was a personal experience but after working in NYC(manhattan) I thought it was one of the coldest and most distant places I have ever experienced. It was the feeling of the city, for all the "if you can make it here you can make it anywhere" there is a lack of collaboration, it is selfish, it feels like people are only out for #1. There is this aura of being better than others, almost snobbishness, which is something I have yet to find in San Francisco.
San Fran is also incredible in terms of the level of intellectual curiosity that you see in most people. Individuals and groups are building,creating, innovating. I don't remember who said it(maybe it was Paul Graham in Hackers and Painters) but there was a comparison of modern day San Francisco to Florence during the Renaissance. I tried to look for resources in New York, but it felt like I was always meeting the same kind of people. I found that people were just living, going to restaurants, talking celebrity gossip. There was no ambition to better oneself, there was no ambition to learn. There is ambition to make money though.
Your point about groupthink is well noted. I would like to point out that artistically, culturally, and musically NYC and SF are not that different. SF is the city of free thinking and has spawned many radical movements (Summer of Love, Beatniks, LGBT social movement), and continues to be ripe with underground/subculture movements. I cannot say NYC doesn't have the Village, but it is a remnant of what it once was as it has undergone extensive gentrification.
Either way these I think are two of the more open cities in the United States and have an environment where one in theory can succeed. Personally I believe that San Fran simply has a different mindset which is embodied in the people.
You can be as successful as you want to be, just be wary of the environmental factors that may sway you into a lifestyle that makes you feel as if you are running in place
$65,000 in Vegas buys you the same quality of life as $100,000 in SF.
That said, NY is really hot in the summer and really cold in the winter. I've been to SF and the weather seems too cold and gloomy (50 and overcast in August!!!!)
Amazon Prime pretty much removes most of the price and sales tax inequality.
The tax difference is real. But then again, the tax difference compared to austin or seattle is also very real too.
And if you think it's going to be affordable to live five minutes walk from your office in NYC, think again.
(disclaimer: lived in both)
NYC is expensive, but not unbelievably so, especially when put next to SF. To live within a 5-10m walk of Palantir's office in the West Village is roughly $4k for a 2BR(so I'll be paying $2k/month). Certainly not low rent by any stretch of the imagination, but it is definitely affordable with an engineer's salary. Also, the difference in salary compensates for this cost.
And you're right about one thing - if I ever found myself suddenly single, I would move back to NYC in a hot second. As a (somewhat) sane straight guy with a bit of money, that dating scene can't be beat. Hands down.
The energy in Silicon Valley has been shifting northwards for the last 10 years. The majority of large companies are in the South Bay, but among companies less than 5 years old, there are as many great ones in SF as in PA/MV.
It's probably not as good as you're getting in New York, but it's significantly better than 90 minutes.
I did the reverse (East coast -> Austin) and could not possibly be happier.
In LA the men still outnumber the women (all you need to do is walk into a crowded bar to see this - it's almost as bad as SF, though not quite) and most of the women are originally from southern CA. Take that as you will.
Having said all that, if you're married/relationshipped/gay?, you can't really beat it if you can afford it!
How about come back in 6 months after you've moved and list the preconceived notions you had that were wrong, and the ones you had that were right and how you like living in NYC? Because this kind of reads like it's going to be this way because this is how I expect it to be.
Disclaimer: I'm moving to New York City in less than two weeks
I will absolutely write up another blog post after 6 months of being in NYC, and let HN know how it went.
But he did say he has only stayed in the South Bay area, it's worlds apart from SF. Palo Alto to Sf is like Fredericksburg to Austin.
What I found funniest was the stat about more women in NYC. The ratio is not really important, I've dated tons of girls in both and have found that it is easier in SF. SF has a diverse female population, and minimal competition as most of the guys are “window shoppers” with no game (read shy engineers) which makes a lot bigger difference than raw numbers.
Very few people who decide to uproot to start their startup elsewhere actually choose NYC over SV.
Frankly, I don't see what the big deal is, lets face it, most programmers are more or less geeks, so all this talk about the better night life and clubs, dating/mingling opportunities etc probably doesn't even apply.
It's all about the person really.
Someone outgoing, will find all of those even in the middle of nowhere in Kansas. And someone with social anxiety will have problems no matter where they are.