I would strike Seattle from this list. Just over the last couple of years, home prices are up 50% or more. It's not SF/SV prices but it's 80-90% there...unfortunately. It is, however, easier to build in Washington, so hopefully this will be a bubble and not a permanent trend.

I wouldn't get too comfortable with the "easier to build" bit, either - Seattle has a strong far-left presence, and as we've seen in SF it's very easy for homeowners to convince them (against all reason) that more housing means higher prices and get them to start blocking new construction across the board (whoever thought up the "100% affordable or not at all!" bit is a genius at playing progressives like a fiddle, and is probably making a killing on a ton of SF property). Meanwhile, the office buildings that are actually luring more people to the city and driving prices up keep getting built, because they're not in the neighborhoods that NIMBYs care about.

I'd leave Seattle on the list.

In SF/SV, the high housing prices extend far enough out from SF to cover almost everything that is in reasonable commute distance. Same for Palo Alto, Sunnyvale, and San Jose.

In Seattle, prices are high or getting there in Seattle, Redmond, and Bellevue, but there is still reasonable housing between Seattle and Tacoma, and across the Sound over in Kitsap county. If you can get a work schedule that lets you miss the heavy commute hours it should be reasonably possible to get affordable housing without too bad a commute.

true this. Average sale price in seattle metro for march was just shy of 700k. The city is trying to be pretty aggressive about building but if you want to live in the city you are going to pay a lot. That being said, if you dont mind commuting you can get a nice place that is affordable(30 minutes commute to the city).

>So long as you and your partner are both making 6 figures

That's a pretty high bar for cost of living. Here in Charlotte, NC, I make half of that, and could support two people without any difficulty.

I get the feeling that tech people no longer have reasonable understandings of cost of living. I live in the PNW and could keep my current nice standard of living on a $60k salary (as a single person). I cannot think of a scenario where I would need two six figure incomes unless I really ramped up spending (private school, nicer car, nicer house).

Yeah. There's definitely a culture tax in the NW. I can freely enjoy the virtues of legal cannabis, frequent the best coffee shops in the world, and hike the glacial peaks all in the same day. To me that's worth the cost.

In Charlotte, I'm 2 hours away from the Appalachian mountains, and can easily get good coffee.

I wouldn't consider legal marijuana worth $100k a year, personally.

> Portland

Rents in Portland are skyrocketing (I had friends whose landlords were pulling out 30% rent increases). I went from Portland to Oakland and my rent isn't that much more.

My brother is moving in from Portland with me in Pittsburgh. He eventually wants to own a house, but that's not possible out there, since he works in a bookstore. He sometimes would complain about Californians moving north, and driving up real estate. Pittsburgh is vastly more affordable.

You can still buy a house in Portland for $500k. I live here. Bought in 2015. It's more expensive in 2017, but not 100% more. Once 1000sqft houses hit a $1mm average Portland will be too expensive. Until then we're doing just fine.

As a point of reference, you can buy a new 3,000+ sq ft house on 5+ acres of land just 30 minutes outside Minneapolis for that!

Not impressed.

Sure, compared the the Midwest or South it's not great, but compared to other west coast cities it's not bad. Portland is cheaper than the bay area, Seattle, LA, and San Diego. It has good culture, great nature, and a mid-sized & growing tech sector.

I dunno, developers were snapping up lots in our hood in Albina for 750, demoing them to lower the tax burden, and letting them sit empty to appreciate. Long term residents who had been renting for 30 years were getting chased out and moving to the numbers... those don't seem like great situations.

> moving to the numbers

I lived in Portland for six years and never once heard this expression and yet I know exactly what you mean.

20 years ago = 57th is bad

10 years ago = 82nd is bad

Now = 122nd is bad

I count myself lucky to live West of 82nd.

That was the same with the Upper East/West side of manhattan, (although truncate the timeframe by 1/2 and going N/S instead of E/W).

Still not as bad as Seattle, though here the rental market has started to slow, while the house market is super hot.

I wonder how many couples make six figures. What is the percentage of population with 350k combined income that are not business owners.

And can both move and find jobs in a new city at once.

I mean, my COMBINED income with my partner is around $160k. This isn't a whole lot of money in a large city, and especially not with children.

Most of southern New Hampshire is within commuting distance of Boston - plus there are no income taxes. Housing is a little pricey, but not compared to Bay Area prices. A 200k+ household income would let you live like kings.

I left New Hampshire a long time ago. It's quite boring.