[rifung]

> don't even know given the cost of living in the Bay Area if $300K is even really "high" anymore.

> If you max out 401k and IRA this is $275k, which is $168K take home or $14k a month.

> Left over: $7400

That sounds like a lot to me? I think the vast majority of the US would absolutely be ecstatic if they could save 7400 a month on top of maxing their 401k.

Just maxing my 401k (with employer match) I'll already have enough for my own retirement. Most people aren't able to do even that though =/

[tempsy]

If you wanted to buy a place then your left over is probably closer to $3400/month.

I haven't added less regular expenses like personal travel costs (maybe another $400/mo on average), misc shopping/clothing ($100), and gym membership ($80).

[usaar333]

To my sibling point above, an $80/month gym is a really damn nice gym. Even a 24 hour fitness super sport is only $52.

I agree that if you want to live on the high end, $300k might not be sufficiently high end. But it's still high by any reasonable metric.

[tempsy]

also factor in tech jobs aren't super stable (or as stable as people think they are)

layoffs happen frequently, the average tenure at any one company is only a few years, and ageism is rampant.

this is hardly a "company for life" role or industry for most.

[pb7]

Average tenure is heavily skewed by massive head count growth. When you add 20,000 employees in one year (Google, 2019) + replace the churn from the population of 100,000 people hopping companies for more compensation, it will drive your average tenure number way down. This is a commonly referenced but completely invalid argument. Very few people are pushed out at the large, stable tech companies.