[mahyarm]

80k* %50 = 40k vs. 160k * %35 = 56k

Bay area in a nutshell. You can have higher savings rates too, I do around %40 and I could save even more. Working at a startup does make it harder, usually it's better to work at FANG. You also learn a lot and realize the difference between 'facebook does this dev practice because it's huge so it has to vs. it's the better practice'

[mdorazio]

Pre or post-tax, and at what standard of living? Weather aside, you can get significantly better housing/schools/daycare/whatever for that 80k elsewhere than you can for 160k in the Bay Area. If you're young and single this is probably a non-factor, but for people >30 it can be significant.

[kobeya]

If you're young and single or dual income, no kids, the bay area is a fantastic place to make high income and save tons of money. Lots of people in r/financialindependence are tech workers in the valley.

If you're starting your own company and want VC investment, I can think of no better place to be than silicon valley, assuming you make use of the social events, meetups, attend YC demo days, rainbow mansion, etc. The personal networking will lead to more and better deals.

But if you have kids, a spouse that doesn't pull in the astronomical salaries, or are trying to bootstrap a company, stay far, far away.

[mahyarm]

Very true on the having kids part. But you typically have 7 years of your life before you reach 30.

Probably contributes to the logan's run effect you see in SV tech companies ;)

What I've seen from colleagues with kids is the spouse also works some sort of 6 figure job and they either commute a lot or bought a house before it got extra crazy. Like one who bought a $600-700k TIC around the Haight ~4 years ago. Or they sacrifice their living standard somehow. The current family set you see today bought when it was more affordable.

[mdorazio]

Good points on how families in the Bay Area are setup today or established themselves a few years ago. To be fair, though, you have 37 years of employment after you reach 30... It's kind of scary to think about the Bay Area being a good place to establish yourself for only 15% of your career. Logan's Run effect indeed.

[mercutio2]

Good developers can make way, way more than 160k total comp without much effort in the Bay Area. Not at startups, so if you want to earn lots of money, don’t join a startup.

You have to be good, and work hard, but I know lots and lots and lots of tech workers who are single earners with kids and a house they didn’t buy before the boom.

[mahyarm]

I agree, but people would of started coming out of the woodwork and giving me even more exceptions to the rule and how it's unrealistic, so I did the startup lower bound.

[JamesBarney]

The pay in San Francisco isn't double what it is other places. Closer to 40% higher(according to Robert Half). Also lots of people are saying that San Francisco has better tech talent. Which mean the actual number is less than 40% because an average San Francisco dev would be only get paid above average in a smaller market.

And the difference is smaller compared to other large markets like Chicago, Houston, and L.A.

[BeetleB]

>Bay area in a nutshell. You can have higher savings rates too

Your example is a higher savings amount, not rate.

In your example, I may still prefer the 80K one. Why?

Assume taxes are a third of your salary in both places.

In the 80K job, you save 40K, and your living expenses are 13.3K

In the 160K job, you save 56K and your living expenses are 50.7K

In Nowhereville, you are saving 3 times your annual cost of living. In SV, you are saving just a little more than 1x.

The result? Even though you save more in SV, you will not be able to retire quicker.

(My claim of 1/3 in taxes in both places is likely inaccurate, but the essence of the calculation doesn't change).

A higher saving amount does not mean earlier retirement (unless you move to a cheap city to retire).

[barrkel]

You'll still need to retire in a cheap city in Nowhereville. Why not live in SV when you're young and retire to Nowhereville, vs living in Nowhereville all your life?

[derefr]

Alternatively, if you can get a remote job, live in Cambodia or the Phillipines or somewhere else with an extremely low cost of living while getting paid 0.5x SV salary, and end up with 95% savings. Then you can retire anywhere.

[kobeya]

0.5 salary (generous for someone remote working in a different timezone without a large personal network, imho) with 95% savings is the same as 48% savings with 1x salary, not to mention greater growth potential. You're example doesn't seem all that different from working in the valley a few years, then cashing out to retire in SE Asia.

[BeetleB]

>Why not live in SV when you're young and retire to Nowhereville, vs living in Nowhereville all your life?

Depends on your preferences. I don't want to move to a new place when I retire. I'd like to retire in the same place where I have friends, know the city, system, etc.

[edoceo]

FANG?

[SriniK]

Probably Facebook, Amazon and Google

[S4M]

Maybe Netflix as well.

[mahyarm]

Also apple. They pay less initially but start matching after a few years.

[rokhayakebe]

Facebook, Amazon, N*, Google

[ako]

Netflix?

[nightski]

Or you know, you don't have to be average and can do 300k * 60% consulting or doing some other slightly more ambitious method while still not living in the bay area.

[kobeya]

Outside of a few very highly specialized fields, I don't know anyone who does that successfully who didn't first get their start and build their network in the valley.

EDIT: To be clear, I do know people that have "done their time" then left and pulled in really nice consulting rates working remotely from rural / flyover america or overseas, albeit often with a lot of travel to customer sites.

[fny]

By argument above, you'd still expect to make significantly more in the Bay Area.