Families earning $117,000 now qualify as “low income” in California's Bay Area

Re:Families earning $117,000 now qualify as “low income” in ... by jogjayr on Wednesday June 27, 2018 @02:28AM (#17406151)

You can save a lot more money, in absolute dollar terms. 20% of 200k is more than 40% of 80k.

People talk about "cost-of-living" like it's some non-negotiable tax that you have to pay to the world. It's true you can't get the same lifestyle at the same price as a low CoL area - no humongous 5 bedroom house with a massive backyard. But it doesn't mean your life has to necessarily suck.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Families earning $117,000 now qualify as “low income” in ... by softawre on Wednesday June 27, 2018 @03:26PM (#17411018)

You can get the 5 bedroom house 15 minutes away from a decent city, 15 minutes away from work, in most states, and not miss out on much from the SV "lifestyle".

I think the only thing I miss out on by not working in SV is working with true world-class talent.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Families earning $117,000 now qualify as “low income” in ... by jogjayr on Thursday June 28, 2018 @01:20AM (#17414264)

Who said anything about the SV lifestyle? I was only talking about the high salaries in SV and the financial opportunities resulting from them.

What I meant was you can't have the same lifestyle in SV as you would in a low CoL area - no humongous house etc. You'd have to adapt and especially downsize on living space. But if you're OK doing that the financial rewards are large.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Families earning $117,000 now qualify as “low income” in ... by jimbofisher1 on Wednesday July 11, 2018 @12:05PM (#17507973)

Financial rewards? Like $2 Million for a house that costs 200k in the rest of the country? What savings!

SV is fine if you never want to buy a home, start a family, live without roomates etc..

[ Parent | on HN ]