Looking to move to California but is SF worth the COL? (San Diego: how much, hotel)

[gaijin_samurai]

Hi All,

I am a educated professional on the East Coast sick of the cold weather and people and am looking to move out to Cali. I have spent a lot of time all over California for work and am simply smitten with it: amazing weather, spectacular scenery, amazing food and wanted to relocate out there. I am looking at SF, SD and LA. I am now hesitant about SF because of the insane housing costs, which seem even worse than NYC. Which city would be ideal for me in terms of long term living, affordability, job prospects, people in comparison to the East Coast cities of NYC, DC and Boston? I really like SF but seems like SD is now far more affordable and people seem a bit nicer and less snooty. LA is a lot of sprawl and would be my third pick. I am guessing that SF Bay Area has a far better economy than SD, is that correct? Which city would you pick? LA seems to have a better economy and jobs than SD, is that right?

[rkwalton]

I'd choose San Francisco, but I live here: BIAS ALERT!

It all depends on what your goals are and what's important. For me, San Francisco is just gorgeous. I was driving in the other morning from Berkeley over the Bay Bridge and, even with a layer of smog, it was lovely. I think it's a fun city too. It's an urban environment surrounded by a lot of natural beauty. From where I live I can see the Pacific Ocean and then gaze north and see the Golden Gate Bridge. When I lived in NYC I could see the subway track.

I'm from L.A. originally and I'd never move back there.

San Diego is also a lovely place, but it's slow.

It's about what works for you, but in terms of the East Coast, San Francisco is as close as you're going to get. The cost of living here is steep. There are already a few threads where people are complaining. I'd say read them and see if anything resonates for you.

Again, I'm biased, so San Francisco all the way!!! (Also, you can live in the Bay Area but live in Marin, East Bay, or Peninsula too.)

[pibbs]

Just move to Oakland

[gaijin_samurai]

Originally Posted by rkwalton

I'd choose San Francisco, but I live here: BIAS ALERT!

It all depends on what your goals are and what's important. For me, San Francisco is just gorgeous. I was driving in the other morning from Berkeley over the Bay Bridge and, even with a layer of smog, it was lovely. I think it's a fun city too. It's an urban environment surrounded by a lot of natural beauty. From where I live I can see the Pacific Ocean and then gaze north and see the Golden Gate Bridge. When I lived in NYC I could see the subway track.

I'm from L.A. originally and I'd never move back there.

San Diego is also a lovely place, but it's slow.

It's about what works for you, but in terms of the East Coast, San Francisco is as close as you're going to get. The cost of living here is steep. There are already a few threads where people are complaining. I'd say read them and see if anything resonates for you.

Again, I'm biased, so San Francisco all the way!!! (Also, you can live in the Bay Area but live in Marin, East Bay, or Peninsula too.)

Whats wrong with LA? The economy is no good or the people?

[gaijin_samurai]

Also can you compare the economies of SD, LA and the Bay Area?

[sav858]

SD is only more affordable than the Bay Area or LA if you have a good job but pay and job prospects are generally limited in comparison. If I wasn't from here and could make what I do down in Sd I'd move back down there but I prefer the lifestyle in SD over here. If you want a faster paced, more urban lifestyle then the Bay Area is better, SD is more beachy and laid back.

If you're career is more important to you then you're better off in the Bay Area overall.

[gaijin_samurai]

Originally Posted by sav858

SD is only more affordable than the Bay Area or LA if you have a good job but pay and job prospects are generally limited in comparison. If I wasn't from here and could make what I do down in Sd I'd move back down there but I prefer the lifestyle in SD over here. If you want a faster paced, more urban lifestyle then the Bay Area is better, SD is more beachy and laid back.

If you're career is more important to you then you're better off in the Bay Area overall.

I mean how much worse off is SD compared to SF? Is it night and day?

[AngusHsu]

Here is a cost of living index I saw the other day from Q3 2011 in order to compare among cities.

[SIZE=3]http://www.cdrpc.org/2011Q3-COLI.pdf[/SIZE]

LA and SD have COL index of 131. SF is 161

If you drive a lot less than where you are from and travel less for fun, then the COL issue can be mitigated in SF.

For a commensurate job, your dollars will go further in LA and SD than in SF. Even if your job in SF pays 20% more, that is not enough to compensate for COL differences.

[ccm123]

Depends on your line of work, I would say. If you work in technology, the Bay Area is the best place to be, as generally speaking, your compensation will be adjusted for the COL.

[u225615]

I love San Francisco but as noted the people appear less friendly and for some that may be a deciding factor. Otherwise SF has the scenery, food, and weather (yes it's cold but put it in perspective while most of the country bakes or steams in the summer SF is cool and while its cold in the winter its not extreme as in many parts of the country that are in a deep freeze or exhausted from all the rain.

I'd suggest LA (and by that I mean along the coast) or even coastal Orange County ...you have great weather, an abundance of food choices and fine dining as well as good weather. San Diego is a great vacation location but it may prove boring in the long run for people who are looking for more than a laid back lifestyle.

Whenever I think of what some peoples idealized version is of life in California I wonder if it's similar to the impression one experiences from the views in places like Las Brisas Restaurant in Laguna Beach or the views from Point Lobos Park in Monterey County or the views from the now defunct Alta Mira Hotel Restaurant in Sausalito.