Are cost of living calculators really correct for SJ? My dilemma Austin->SV? (San Jose: houses)

[ncwCD]

I have a job offer in SV that'd be technically rewarding but would be a big effective pay cut.

I gross $105,000 in Austin and have an offer for $135,000 in SV.

COL calculators say that I would need to make $171,000 to not take an effective pay loss.

Have people found these roughly correct- from wherever they came? I know that income taxes and housing expenses and almost everything is radically higher than almost everywhere else in the United States.

I'm very much on the fence. There are qualitative factors too.

I find San Jose / South Bay very boring compared to (Central) Austin. I do value that Austin is kind of a weird mix of elements of Boston/SF/Washington DC in a compact area, instead almost everyone doing techie stuff.

Is SV really as suburban/bland as it seems to a visitor? (I know there's SF, but it's not really close, being almost an hour away.)

[NewToCA]

I don't think the SJ area is bland at all, but I'd say the Cost of Living Calculators are actually being a bit conservative about the cost difference between Austin and SJ.

[Wintermomma]

Originally Posted by NewToCA

I don't think the SJ area is bland at all, but I'd say the Cost of Living Calculators are actually being a bit conservative about the cost difference between Austin and SJ.

I agree. We used that when we came here, and I think it under-estimated the COL here.

[mysticaltyger]

Originally Posted by NewToCA

I don't think the SJ area is bland at all, but I'd say the Cost of Living Calculators are actually being a bit conservative about the cost difference between Austin and SJ.

San Jose not bland? Eh, really? Even most San Joseans admit their city is a little on the dull side.

I agree that if you are trying to replicate the same lifestyle you are living in Austin (especially regarding housing) the COL calculators are too low. The reality is most people have less living space here than where they lived before, but if you are not willing to do that, then your cost of living will definitely be higher than what the calculator says.

[roadwarrior101]

In regards to your two questions, I'll start off with Cost of Living. I agree with the other poster who said that your estimates are on the conservative side. If you're taking the average housing value in Austin vs San Jose, then maybe. Keep in mind that if you want to live in a good school district, its a bit more extreme. A friend of mine from b-school moved to Austin and bought a nice 3 bedroom house (approx 2k sq ft) in South Austin, which he said is a good school district. I think he paid approx. $300k. I don't think the average SJ house is in a good school district. Most of the schools in SJ are not good, with the exception of west San Jose or Almaden Valley. A friend of mine paid about $650k for a 1,400 sq ft "fixer upper" in west SJ. I live in Mtn View and can tell you that nice houses here of 2,000 sq ft would be in the $1M - $1.5M range. And I'd say that this is just upper middle class, maybe on par with south Austin.

In terms of dullness, I'd say that SJ takes a lot of heat for its proximity to SF. Being the ugly stepchild to one of the world's greatest cities (50 miles away) is tough. I'd say that SJ is on par in terms of things to do with most Midwestern cities. Now, the other part of the equation are the types of people here. It is very very techy. Its not exactly hipster central, like you would have in Austin, SF, Seattle, Portland, etc. This tends to skew the proportions of people here who are either very geeky, male and/or Indian/Chinese. Its probably not the best place to live as a single white guy. Now, if you're talking about places to raise a family, if you can afford a place in the West Valley, you can't do much better.

[hsw]

Real question is one's own expected income growth due to own skills and career liquidity simply b/c most of world's smartest engineers and angel investors, BigTechs and leading start-ups are based in PaloAlto (not SJ, not SF) corridor, nowhere else on planet in such absolute or per capita nos.....COL vs income for any single workaholic is trivial in SV/SF

Amused by claims of "boredom"....BigTechs prefer self-contained suburban campuses for various security/convenience/IP considerations....and when engineers make enough money to play/retire they tend to get wkend places in LA and all the usual toys of semi-retirement

Most highly paid workers w/kids live in suburbs nr PaloAlto; singles often live in SF; no where else on planet where high-income single workaholics can commute 35+mi dists from SF home to SV office in <45mins on scenic, autobahn-like 280 (and w/o dealing w/nasty weather of ex-coastal CA world)....hell, the subway commutes from UES/UWS to GS take longer (and are far more sweaty and smelly)

And what cos. has allegedly "cool" Aus created since dying boxmaker Dell of 25+yrs ago? Aus is quite a Luddite town, sort of like Redmond's MSFT or Seatt's AMZN....no new valuable tech co. created in commie Seatt (or Bos or NYC) in 15+yrs, either....would argue more valuable innovation has come out of DFW or OKC or Hou in shale o&g than in anything hw/sw related from anywhere in TX (or Eastern US)