[csallen]

They were talking about how to save money, and from that limited discussion you came to two completely unjustified conclusions: (1) their overall quality of life will be lower in SF, and (2) the only benefit is that SF is "cool". Nothing they said suggested either of those two things.

[chii]

Logically, one would try to save money by cutting the largest disposable expense first, before proceeding to the next largest, in order.

By the time you'd get to the expense of owning a car, I presume a lot of other luxury expense would've been dispensed. Therefore, it's logical to assume you'd get a lower quality of life as a result.

[Lambdanaut]

What is quality of life?

If lacking a car, you find yourself walking more, aren't you healthier? Doesnt San Fran have among the greatest selection of fresh foods in the country?

We can go on, but clearly cutting expenses doesn't necessarily mean a lower quality of life.

[lmm]

Cars are a very expensive luxury. Probably the first thing I cut from my life. I am genuinely struggling to think of any more expensive luxury (housing costs more but it's pretty much a necessity).

[thaumasiotes]

The cost of owning a car is not equal in all locations.

[Ericson2314]

Nor is there benefit