Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Pittsburgh is a good one though. Real bang for buck, can have a decently urban lifestyle too if that's what you choose. Some nice suburbs too. Good computer science higher ed infrastructure with CMU and Pitt.
Bay Area rent and taxes are high sure, but come on, it's very easy to save money with the salaries you can get there. Like I said, at the right company one could easily save more than that entire Atlanta salary you mentioned with an entry level role.
What you can't do in the Bay Area is buy a single family house, but that is a specific lifestyle adjustment that the OP did not mention.
Not true. Not even close. When the salaries in the Bay Area are 30% above the national average but the cost of living/housing is 6-7x the national average, it's far from easy to save money. Even those working in the tech industry, it would be a big struggle. The buying power in the Bay Area is abysmal. And in some states, like WA, where there's "no income tax", they gouge in with an overall higher cost of living. It's a shell game. I've worked with metro data for 36 years, trust me, the numbers don't add up when you run them.
For the OP, I'd go with Atlanta. If you're willing to fudge a little on transportation, the Raleigh/Durham area would be a good darkhorse. But my top choice would be Atlanta. You will live and save a lot better there and there's a lot of great outdoor recreation there. Great area!
Not true. Not even close. When the salaries in the Bay Area are 30% above the national average but the cost of living/housing is 6-7x the national average, it's far from easy to save money. Even those working in the tech industry, it would be a big struggle. The buying power in the Bay Area is abysmal. And in some states, like WA, where there's "no income tax", they gouge in with an overall higher cost of living. It's a shell game. I've worked with metro data for 36 years, trust me, the numbers don't add up when you run them.
For the OP, I'd go with Atlanta. If you're willing to fudge a little on transportation, the Raleigh/Durham area would be a good darkhorse. But my top choice would be Atlanta. You will live and save a lot better there and there's a lot of great outdoor recreation there. Great area!
That 30% number is inaccurate. The difference is more like 75%. See Atlanta vs SF Bay Area.
That's also not accounting for the fact that Atlanta barely has any companies that make this list. Only 157 data points compared to 9327 in the Bay Area. The average Atlanta company probably pays more like the $105k number quoted earlier, which would be poverty in the Bay Area.
I work as a software engineer, so I have some familiarity in this space...
Re: the cost of living comparison, that's looking at it in terms of apples to apples. As I mentioned, you can't buy a house in the Bay Area. You'd have to live in a small apartment. If okay with that, however, you are going to save much more with a good job there.
Albany-Schenectady-Troy area of NY has multiple mountains ranges nearby and a tech scene, while offering a mix of neighborhoods. https://www.nytechloop.org/jobs
Last edited by ckhthankgod; 01-05-2021 at 03:07 PM..
I've also considered Minneapolis or Madison. Any thoughts on these?
Upper Midwest nature wouldn't be as exciting as in, say, the western US, but both of those cities do have a lot of nice lakes (and Great Lakes within a few hours). Although if you're in that part of the country, why not look at Chicago? Depending on what kinds of urban amenities you value, you could get more for your money there than in Minneapolis or Madison.
Work remote from home and live wherever you want. There's no need to be tied down to a specific location. I've been working remote for 6 years and will never go back to an office environment.
OP: could you clarify your development skills and desired work environment, and what kind of nature you want to access?
If you have the qualifications to get a job with a FAANG or similar company and a desire to work in that kind of environment, then the higher salary in the Bay Area may well outweigh the higher cost of living (as long as you don't mind renting). But that isn't all software engineers.
Camping in the woods is possible almost everywhere. Camping in a large national forest - fewer places. Camping in the mountains, or by the ocean - even fewer.
I'm sorry but the Bay Area (and perhaps even moreso Seattle) would offer orders of magnitude more take home pay than $105k in Atlanta. In fact, if living conservatively, it's not at all unreasonable to top $105k in after-tax savings per year.
For a view of Bay area software engineering salaries, look at levels.fyi. To say that you are going to save more making 105k in Atlanta is so far off. What Atlanta would allow for is buying and living in a large house, if your lifestyle dictates that, which is pretty much unobtainable in the Bay Area.
Even using a non-decimal logarithmic base, it's unlikely that there would be even a single order of magnitude difference in take home pay, certainly not more than one.
OP: could you clarify your development skills and desired work environment, and what kind of nature you want to access?
If you have the qualifications to get a job with a FAANG or similar company and a desire to work in that kind of environment, then the higher salary in the Bay Area may well outweigh the higher cost of living (as long as you don't mind renting). But that isn't all software engineers.
Camping in the woods is possible almost everywhere. Camping in a large national forest - fewer places. Camping in the mountains, or by the ocean - even fewer.
Even using a non-decimal logarithmic base, it's unlikely that there would be even a single order of magnitude difference in take home pay, certainly not more than one.
My mistake, I meant to say savings rather than take home pay. There is simply a really big difference between making $380k/yr at facebook (average salary at E5, eg ~10 yoe) vs. $150k/yr in Atlanta. California taxes certainly won't cover that. Cost of living difference could cover that, but it depends on your lifestyle. One living a spartan lifestyle is certainly better off at $380k/yr. With kids and a big house, yeah Atlanta will be better.
But I agree with you that the difference is at higher-end companies which may not be an option.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
