Ok got it, so your answer is you don't have kids and you don't live in the bay area. I grew up in the suburbs in another state, didn't do those "expensive activities" you're talking about, and am well aware of what you're trying to say. But I also live in the bay area now, and have kids, and can confidently say that it's a different experience for kids than what you are talking about.

> But I also live in the bay area now, and have kids, and can confidently say that it's a different experience for kids than what you are talking about.

The different experience is that you make more than your parents did at your age and thus have lifestyle inflation.

The IT guy for a car dealership in Milwaukee is allowed this kind of "lifestyle inflation" no problem. The point of Silicon Valley is that high level and differentiated computer skills can make you rich. Part of that might be slumming it a bit during the early stages of your career or startup, hence the commandment against lifestyle inflation. But in a career role, your Silicon Valley TC better give you a better lifestyle than what’s generic computer guy gets from a non-tech business in a normal metro area. And given prices here, that’s a big number.

Obviously Bay Area amenities are worth something. Are they worth descending an entire social class? Maybe to some. But I think most rational people will go fix the computers at that car dealership, and put their kids on the travel team. You are not obliged to live an austere life just because someone offered you a (locally) mediocre job in the Bay Area.

The IT guy at a car dealership isn't expecting to pay full price for private schools and then complaining when it wipes out almost all of their take home pay. That's probably because the IT guy for a car dealership is making $70k not $500k a year.

Nobody's "descending a social class" by sending their kids to public school or having them do normal stuff, this is hysterical.