[swiley]

45 minutes means an hour and a half of your life every day that you don't get paid for and have to just throw away. (not only that but spending it doing one of the more dangerous things you can do in the US: driving.)

That combined with the ridiculous housing costs in the bay area makes me wonder why anyone (especially more numerate people) would tolerate not working remotely.

[panopticon]

> makes me wonder why anyone (especially more numerate people) would tolerate not working remotely

Honest question: are there a substantial number of remote companies paying bay area FAANG salaries? You put in any decent time at these places and your total comp is at least $300-500k/yr.

You'd have to move somewhere really cheap for the math to work out in favor of that remote gig if you're leaving $100-300k on the table. Being in a place without state income tax moves the needle quite a bit, but you're still likely to come out behind.

Caveat emptor: lifestyle changes this math a lot.

[freyr]

Can you get a nice house in a good neighborhood near the office on $300k/year in the Bay Area these days? A lot of people in the Bay Area make a lot less.

There are just so many markets in the US where you’ll find a much nicer house in a better neighborhood for a fraction of the cost. If you already own a house in the Bay Area, you’re set. But otherwise, the paycheck begins to look a bit like an illusion.

[panopticon]

My question was about FAANG-level salaries specifically though. You're probably not going to be able to buy a house near the office on that salary, no. But renting is still a viable option.

To provide an anecdote: my wife and I moved to the Bay Area from Kansas City and housing as a portion of after-tax income increased from 16% to 24% renting a smaller single-family house with the same bedroom count (significantly smaller yard though), but my income is over 3x higher out here. I might not be building equity by owning a home, but I have invested most of the additional income and am way ahead of my salaried homeowning friends in the midwest on net worth. Plus we get to spend most of our weekends in the mountains.

tl;dr: It really depends on your income, lifestyle, and priorities whether it adds up in the end.

[freyr]

I’m mid-career, work at FANG, and that is close to my salary. Perhaps my situation isn’t the norm because I moved into FANG from a very specialized job and got downleveled. But the point is that even within FANG, not everyone is pulling in $400k+.

The 3x income seems meaningless if I’m reading correctly. You ended up with 2x for a smaller house and yard, which to be fair is a reasonable tradeoff.

[dm8]

> That combined with the ridiculous housing costs in the bay area makes me wonder why anyone (especially more numerate people) would tolerate not working remotely.

Maybe some people genuinely like living in the bay area. It is a beautiful place.

[swiley]

Is it twice-thrice as beautiful as the rest of the country though?

[ec109685]

Your job only has to pay for the cost of living delta between the two places to be financially worth it. That isn’t twice-thrice as much.

[ashtonkem]

Sure, and you can WFH in the bay area and enjoy the bits around your home rather than the inside of your car.

[door101]

> 45 minutes means an hour and a half of your life every day that you don't get paid for and have to just throw away. (not only that but spending it doing one of the more dangerous things you can do in the US: driving.)

I've never found commuting to be "thrown away", but I've never commuted by car. I can read, listen to a podcast, or just people watch on the train. Or when biking/walking to work, I get some exercise. Seems to me the problem isn't commuting, but car commuting.

[layoutIfNeeded]

>45 minutes means an hour and a half of your life every day that you don't get paid for and have to just throw away.

Wasted??? Listening to motivational podcasts while sitting in a traffic jam for 45 minutes is not wasted time! /s