Just make sure you don't live in those cities proper :P
Of course, if you live in the valley, you could save more, but the point is to illustrate that many (single, no dependents) tech workers can live in SF and still save.
http://www.payrollforamerica.com/calculators/California-payr...
suggests the numbers are: $13.4k to feds, $5k social security, $1.1k medicare, $5k california, $800 CA SDI
Leaving you with $54,725.
$24k to housing and $20k to savings would leave you with just over $10k to eat, shop, pay for transportation, etc. So, don't try to have a car. Even carless, though, it seems much easier / more likely / more realistic to do it the other way around - $20k on food/entertainment/shopping/etc and $10k to savings.
The effective tax rate in Cali after federal and state is closer to 40%. That leaves 48k after taxes. Take out the 24k you blew on the 2k/mo apt and you're down to 24k and you haven't even put food on your plate or paid for transportation costs.
Take out 4k for food assuming you don't eat at nice restaurants. Take out 2k for a train pass and maybe another 0.5k for other transportation when the train isn't adequate. You are now down to 17.5k and you haven't saved anything or done anything 'to play'.
There is a reason the poverty level is around 70k in that area. 80k looks good on paper but in reality it's crap. It's about parity with a 37k salary in Austin, TX. http://www.bestplaces.net/cost-of-living/san-francisco-ca/au...
It won't.
At 2013 rates, on $80k of total income for an individual ($73,900 in income subject to income tax with the $6,100 standard deduction, but no other deductions/credits):
Effective federal income tax on total income: 18.0%
Effective CA income tax rate on total income: 5.72%
SS+Medicare: 7.65%
California State Disability Insurance tax: 1.00%
Total effective income and payroll tax rate: 32.4%Oh, sorry, I thought we were talking about someone who is making the bare minimum effort to save money. My mistake.
OK, I'm done talking about this shifted scenario from what we started talking about. When you want to talk about how hard it is to save money in SF if you actually make any serious effort, I'm happy to resume.
>I thought we were talking about someone who is making the bare minimum effort to save money
Do you know what the bare minimum effort means? You are the one suggesting bare minimum effort now.
A native English speaker would not make the mistake of using a colloquialism that means the opposite of the literal definition when the very disagreement is about the effort it takes to save money. You can live by yourself in the bay area and still save money. Remember, you were the one that quoted $2k/mo for rent.