Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

What's your definition of wealthy?

Because many software developers in SV might make over 100K (most do) but have vastly less money left over to actually save compared to someone earning less than half that in other places.

I recently considered an opportunity in SV and after getting over the initial shock of how much they thought I was worth, I realized I as in better economic shape staying where I am and earning what appears to be a lot less. And I'm not what I'd consider wealthy at all.

I recently saw an article here on HN about a guy who worked for Google for 10 years then quit and started his own company. He says in that decade he saved 100K, and my thought was, that's all, for 10 years at Google? I earn a lot less than he did, but I'm saving at nearly triple that rate.



> Because many software developers in SV might make over 100K (most do) but have vastly less money left over to actually save compared to someone earning less than half that in other places.

That's just not true.

If you're working in SF on 100k/year, your pay after tax is 5750. Spending 2k/month on rent leaves you with 3750/month, which is almost the pay before tax of someone on half that.


When you add up how much a life costs in SF compared to many other places (and in my case I was comparing to life in a large West-European city where I currently live, and where driving/owning a car is a rarity, where healthcare is ubiquitous and relatively inexpensive), there is a significant economic advantage when earning nearly half what you'd earn in SF.

I'm not just talking about rent (which, incidentally, for my family, 2K per month is much lower than the rent we were looking at to accommodate our kids and private life without roommates in SF), but also about how much you spend on your transportation or gas every day, your healthcare premiums and deductibles, cost of groceries and entertainment, auto mortgages and/or insurance for 2 cars (because 1 car for a family wouldn't cut it there).... and the answer becomes obvious.


What adult is paying 2k in rent in SV, with 4 roommates that may be possible... If you want to live like that fine but most of America can afford to buy a substantial house for 2k a month.


I don't live in SF, I had a cursory google and came up with [0] for 2100/month. My point was that even spending that amount on rent, and paying tax on a 100k salary, that you still have more left over at that point than someone on 50k a year will _gross_ and have to pay rent and taxes out of. The commenter I replied to said:

> many software developers in SV might make over 100K (most do) but have vastly less money left over to actually save compared to someone earning less than half that in other places.

Not that he couldn't afford to buy a substantial house in SF.

[0] https://www.zillow.com/homedetails/411A-Lincoln-Way-San-Fran...


Sure and I bet you could find a $500/mo room in a crack house. Doesn't mean a working professional would be willing to live there.

Frankly a realistic number is $3000/mo for a 1BR and my point is that you could own an incredible home in most of the country for that price. People in SV have Stockholm Syndrome and justify the horrendous cost of living, rampant homelessness, insane working hours etc. with their cries of "but look at all my stock options!"

Meanwhile their counterparts in places like Austin make over $100k, can easily own a substantial home, have excellent life-work balance and shocker... have SUBSTANTIAL SAVINGS as well.


1) There are lots of people that are really bad at saving.

2) $100k could be liquid savings in cash, with the rest in GSUs or diversified investments.


To be more wealthy than 50% of the planet, you need a net worth of... $2,223 USD.

https://qz.com/848181/half-of-all-adults-in-the-world-have-l...


He might have only 100k in cash, but he probably has more than 500k in stock




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: