[slap_shot]

> the three of us live in the San Francisco Bay Area, and Steve and I each have three kids; we knew that the dollar figure that would allow us to live without financial distress – which we put at $175,000 a year

Putting aside the fact that is terrible way to determine the rate of pay for anyone, let alone every single person in a company - how on earth did they come up with such a lower number for such a high cost of living area?

[alfalfasprout]

Yeah... $190k sounds a lot except in any HCOL area (SF, NY, LA, Seattle, heck even Portland has skyrocketed) it's going to feel very tight with three kids.

[nebula8804]

190 isn't enough for LA? I was thinking of moving there while making ~120k. Granted I have no kids or anything but I thought 120k could make it in LA?

[zamnos]

Plenty of people do. $190k's just this ridiculous "from first principles" logic game on how much money you need to "survive" there, but it really means "not panic over money or going hungry and bank a little in an emergency fund and a retirement account" level of living, and not "If I eat ramen for a week I can afford the concert ticket" level of subsistence.

[nebula8804]

But is 120k at least somewhat comfortable for a single person? These different levels you described really hit different as you age. Yeah I could be ramen level but if the option is to not be ramen level at 120k elsewhere then moving to LA is not worth it but if there is a minimum level of comfort then other things make it worth making the move.

[zamnos]

LA and the surrounding area isn't cheap to live in. It really all depends on what you do with your money and how lavishly you want to live but I'd say $120k is actually quite reasonable if you're able to live reasonably. Given the choice of $120k in LA or $120k elsewhere, I'm not going to lie, the $120k is going to go further elsewhere (except for, like, SF or New York), but then you're not in LA.

I also don't mean to impugn ramen either, as LA's got some really really good ramen restaurants. It all comes down to if you want to or not. LA's got a lot to offer but it's not for everybody.

[bcrosby95]

I make 150k in LA, with 3 kids, and am the primary income earner. It kinda depends on where you live, LA is a big place with a hugely varying cost of living. I live in the suburbs and it's enough. If I lived in Venice I couldn't afford rent.

[nebula8804]

How about Echo Park. I wanna be around people somewhat near my age range to help stave off(but not eliminate) my crippling depression.

[bcrosby95]

If you're single you can probably find a place you could afford to live in.

[jchonphoenix]

I'm curious how they make this work in sf unless they own a home or bought a long while back.

[ramesh31]

>I'm curious how they make this work in sf unless they own a home or bought a long while back.

Comment shows how warped our expectations really are. It's still a 90th percentile household income in the SFBA: https://www.vitalsigns.mtc.ca.gov/income

[seattle_spring]

It’s so, so fascinating how distorted some folks’ views on money are on HN. There’s also a guy who pops in threads like this and insists that $250k in the Bay Area is “basically poverty.” It only becomes difficult to live on if you insist on private schooling, full-time daycare, BMW-level cars with private parking, etc.

[bcrosby95]

I don't think 250k in the bay area is poverty. But anything under 200k, if you have kids - while not being a struggle - is definitely in "1 vacation per year, never eat out, and watch your budget like a hawk" territory.

[reducesuffering]

You can rent many middle class homes (4b/2b 1.7k sqft) within a 30 min. commute of their office for $3.5k - $4.5k a month. That salary after tax is $10.5k per month. That's without a partner/spouse working.

[pclmulqdq]

They're all doing fine. I would assume all three of them have an 8-figure net worth given how long they have been in the industry.

[jppope]

they're all industry vets... its not a "college dropouts in an apartment" startup.