You're arguing a point that the paper isn't making.
EDIT: Spelling
1) Boston seems to be risk averse when it comes to investing -- its just the mind-set.
2) Boston is really SaaS focused (safe) -- most young people want to work in a consumer space.
3) There isn't enough executive talent and for that matter VP level talent. You can see the evidence in the lack of IPOs. How good number of Boston companies seem to fall out of sky at the same stage (I can name some names but I won’t).
4) Facebook and Dropbox should of been Boston companies.
PS: I still love Boston and I am really happy to be part of the tech scene with such a bright future.
Starting Median pay in San Fran: $57,200 - http://www.forbes.com/pictures/efkk45mhij/no-2-best-paying-c...
Average Rent in Boston (1 BR): ~$2000 - http://boston.jumpshell.com/how-to/where-to-live-in-boston/a...
Average Rent in San Fran (1 BR): $2873 - http://www.rentjungle.com/average-rent-in-san-francisco-rent...
Rent / Salary in Boston: 0.0396
Rent / Salary in San Fran: 0.0502
"There's no affordable housing, and median salaries for most graduates are nowhere near commensurate with the cost of living in the Boston metro area." Certainly no worse than San Fran, at least. As to the rest of the comment, how has Boston hurt you?
EDIT: and your percentages are wrong: try 48% of gross for BOS and 60% of gross for SF. Figure 40% for taxes and you have either very little for food, insurance, medical care, transportation, clothing, entertainment or you're already negative. Oh, and I forgot: STUDENT LOANS.
You can also consider that it's comparing median starting income to average 1 BR rent. One wouldn't expect just starting out that you would have an average single bedroom.
But if a college graduate has to spend 95% or 105% of their after-tax income just on rent there is ZERO left for student loans and insurance, the conclusion is that both cities are completely unfeasible except for graduates with very wealthy and generous parents.
Your sole point is that "SF is more unaffordable than Boston". So what: living on a moon base would cost even more than SF.
> one would not expect that just starting out that you would have an average single bedroom
I have had a lot of roommates a lot, but I don't even see how that's workable in SF for the vast majority of graduates. And we are talking about college graduates: these are people whose employers expect them to arrive clean and rested, which is difficult to do when sleeping under a bridge, and who didn't grow up expecting to have to wait until they have 10 years of experience and 3 children to finally afford a 1-bedroom apartment.
All we can do is make apples to apples comparisons. You're trying to stretch the data to say something it doesn't. For example, as soon as you start looking at 2 or 3 bedrooms split between roommates both cities become more reasonable.
EDIT: I don't think having 2 roommates in a 3 bedroom apartment is quite comparable to sleeping under a bridge. I don't understand why you're being so hyperbolic.
So, certainly no worse than the single least affordable city in the entire country.
>As to the rest of the comment, how has Boston hurt you?
Honestly, I just kinda hate cold climate zones, especially when they're snobby while also offering low quality of life. But mostly I just really hate cold climates.
oh well, only 36 days until the shortest day of the year!