I own and am not sure. Could have bought in San Francisco in 2001 and decided to buy on the peninsula instead. Cupertino still had starter homes < 500,000 at that time but I didn't want to live there, either. For a while there it looked like a mistake to not live in the city then the market turned insane and the peninsula housing market is almost as hot as the city. Part of me wants to take the profit and run but to where?

Midwest? Buy 10-15 rent houses in a college town and retire.

My neighbor owns 15 houses and lives in Europe most the year. I'm working on the same path (may buy their homes in the next year or two, we're in discussions).

Does this plan mean living in the town and doing the property management or is it more self sustaining remote?

You can do it either way. The risk threshold from my perspective is how much you charge in rent, with how large your deposit is, along with how often you inspect your properties.

Also, you have to be prepared to sue, file liens, and use sheriff evictions.

Everything is easier if you're local. If your investment is large enough, flying in to deal with your properties is a reasonable business expense (I wouldn't do it outside setting up a company and having general liability in addition to your normal house insurance).

The same place, but as a renter? That's what I'd do if I were up ~1M on a house.

The Toronto market has recently rolled over and prices are falling. I knew a few people who were able to sell at the peak of the market. I also know one person who tried to sell, the downturn happened and the buyer pulled out.

Some folks were able to walk away with $1M cash and just rented after. The rent to home price ratio is crazy in Toronto and they were able to rent a home for $3000 that would cost $6000 in mortgage payments.

Nearly anywhere.

Unfortunately no. Not all of us are thrilled about a life of remote work. I for one work best side by side with a team of people. That environment is only easily attained in the exact places that have ridiculous real estate markets. I've looked many times at different markets and for me moving doesn't make sense. So near Seattle I stay.

Surely, you're not serious about this?

I work (in an office, not remote, mind you) at a tech company in the Research Triangle area of North Carolina. Most of the people I know also work in tech companies. In fact, outside of state government and the school systems, the major employers around here are all tech companies and research universities. You can easily have an entire career in tech, working in-person, in good jobs doing cool stuff. And the cost of living around here is a tiny fraction of what you'd pay in the SF/NY/LA/Seattle.

If you want to live in [big overpriced city] because you like said big overpriced city, feel free to do so. But HN really needs to get over this ridiculous idea that big, overpriced cities are the only place to have a tech career.

I just moved from Seattle to Raleigh, and I'm still trying to learn the local tech scene. Can you share any info publicly on companies doing cool stuff around here?

You're right. I don't actually know enough about the distribution of tech careers to hold a strong opinion. I'm largely operating off my own experience, which is this. When I look for jobs in less populous, more affordable areas I tend to run into the same thing. There are mostly regional/local companies looking for very specific types of engineers and more generalized engineering opportunities are almost always looking for 10-15 years more experience than I have. As someone who is still a junior engineer of the generalist variety I've been unable to find much. I'll admit, I haven't looked on the east coast though, as that's very far from my family.

I am a Bay Area resident interested in the Raleigh tech scene. Any interest in connecting? Can be reached at 650 338 2164

"That environment is only easily attained in the exact places that have ridiculous real estate markets."

There are places in middle America with open positions for many people that have relatively inexpensive living costs in comparison to places like SV, Seattle, New York, and so on.

I did a cursory search on craigslist and last months hiring post and most of what I could find had very specific prerequisite experience, some had low 3-5 maximum years experience, and the selection of jobs was pretty low barring the West/East Coast, Austin would be in the running but I moved from there. You mentioned New York as too similar, but there are a lot of interesting companies there.

Chicago, Indianapolis, Minneapolis, Nashville, Columbus all fit your criteria and have “cheap” housing. It’s a big country.

As someone who grew up in nowhere Illinois it’s funny when I hear Chicago has “cheap” housing.

I would not recommend moving to Chicago proper until Illinois gets their major fiscal problems worked out. If you absolutely can't avoid it, living in Gary, Indiana, or Kenosha, Wisconsin, will do until then. Take the Metra if you need to get into the city.

Indianapolis has some of the cheapest housing in the US, but it also has very low salaries for software professionals. I have a lot of family there, and I just can't move back. Sure, it's nice to own your entire house for only $150k, but the pay cut means you'll spend longer paying it off than you thought.

==I would not recommend moving to Chicago proper until Illinois gets their major fiscal problems worked out.==

Recommending people move to Gary or Kenosha simply to avoid living in Chicago is pretty silly and a vast over-reaction. Markets have priced in the fiscal issues and Chicago is still cheaper than comparable cities for tech professionals. Even with increased taxes, Chicago will remain cheaper than New York, Seattle, Denver, Los Angeles, San Francisco, Boston and DC.

Pretty much every city/state in the US has a pension crisis and will require tax increases. Would you recommend people avoid these places?:

- Houston - https://www.houstonchronicle.com/news/politics/houston/artic...

- Dallas - https://www.dallasnews.com/news/dallas-city-hall/2017/11/13/...

- All of California - http://www.sacbee.com/opinion/editorials/article199693069.ht...

- Seattle - http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2017/08/22/what-seattle-incom...

Yes, yes I would. Avoid those places.

Always prefer to live in places that do not have basket case governments that kick the can down the road for the next guy to fix. Previous generations avoided fixing the problems by anticipating that new blood would bring in their money, and they could grow their way out of trouble. Don't be the sucker that comes in to a new situation who is then expected to carry old baggage.

I don't think Illinois is bad enough that anyone should move away if they already live there, but their choices are to move away, become more politically active, or be left holding the bag for prior decades of bad government.

It's like any other relationship. You're going to have an easier time with someone who seems capable of dealing with their own problems, than with the person who pushes responsibility for their problems on to you.

If you simply must live in a particular place, you need to account for bad government as a price premium. If you intend to work in California, you need to increase your salary demands, to account for its insufficient housing stock and property tax laws. It just so happens that many businesses in California can currently meet those demands. A lot of places with bad government cannot, so just don't go there.

And if your local government seems to be turning sour, you need to stand up, make some noise, and let those responsible know that you will not allow your home to become one of those places. If things still go bad, leave. Corruption only works when people go along with it.

And that is why I moved from Chicago to Kenosha in 2002. As it happened, I then moved again to Madison in 2005, but that was moving to something rather than moving from something else.

What kind of city sells its own parking meters? The kind you don't move into.

In the 16 years since you left Chicago, the sky hasn't fallen. The percentage of population with a college degree is the highest of the country's 7 largest cities (http://midwest.chicagofedblogs.org/?p=3048), which implies educated people are disagreeing with you. Also, if your claim is about taxes, you seem to be misinformed as:

- Wisconsin has higher income taxes than Illinois

- Kenosha and Madison have higher property tax rates than Chicago

The parking meters were sold 10 years ago under a different mayor, update your talking points. Meanwhile, Wisconsin is handing out $3 billion to a Chinese manufacturing company (http://money.cnn.com/2017/09/18/news/scott-walker-signs-foxc...). This is the same Wisconsin (and same governor) who cut school funding a few years earlier (http://www.politifact.com/wisconsin/statements/2014/sep/07/g...).

What kind of state cuts school funding and then gives billions to a Chinese company? The kind I don't move to.

My buddy bought his house in the city in 2011. I was going to do the same but a 3400/mo mortgage seemed fucking nuts.

His house has more than doubled in equity though, so not too bad from his perspective. I moved back to the midwest where shit is reasonable, now I just blow that 3400/mo on fun stuff instead of mortgage/rent.

They can always skip the country if prices collapse. No skin the the game.