Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by dbish 575 days ago
That only matters if you spend the majority of your income. For many high paying tech workers the amount you save matters more and doesn’t change enough comparatively if your rent doubles for example.
1 comments

If you want to buy a house, it's going to be a lot more than double to live in the Bay Area vs say rural Arizona.
Absolutely this. A down payment in the valley is enough to buy outright in most of the USA.
Sure and that’s still not the majority of your income over a 10+ yr period if you’re getting paid good bay area wages as a senior+ engineer.

Not to mention that buying a house isn’t a requirement of living in a location (and isn’t the right financial choice for many places when comparing to rent).

A decent house in the Bay Area is >$2M. Why would I pay that when I can make the same money and buy a much better house for $500k, work from home, not have a commute (which is hideous in the BA) and not have some little micro manager breathing down my neck all day? It's a massive quality of life improvement all around.
Because the point is you can’t make the same money working from home elsewhere. So you have to make a tradeoff
That's not true, I definitely make the same money remotely that I would make anywhere else. Full remote companies don't care where you live and pay just as much as RTO places, often more.
Sure. But if you didn’t have to pay it (ie living there wasn’t a requirement)?
We’re talking about trade offs here right? Not saying you get everything.

But no I wouldn’t live in rural Arizona over the Bay Area or most cities unless there was a very strong extra reason to live there (like a manhattan project) and definitely not for a pay cut even if cost of living was near 0.

What about urban arizona? Or someplace like onaha which is a city with plenty of city things todo but still low cost