Support NeoGAF

[Estellex]

Most people think you need at least $100k/yr to live comfortably in San Francisco, but with a bit of budgeting, you can live with $62,000/yr and even $50k/yr. In a city like San Francisco, you won't need a car, so you can cut down a lot of expenses.

$62,000/yr is around $3,800 take home.

Rent: $1,200 (You can get a private room in a shared house for around $1,000 - $1,200 on Craiglist)
Living expenses: $1,000 (This is for utilities, hygiene, supplies, entertainment, eating out, etc.)
Savings: $1,600

$50,000/yr is around $3,000 take home.

Rent: $1,200
Living expenses: $1000
Savings: $800


What do you guys think?

 

[GHG]

The rule of thumb when figuring out if it's feasible to live somewhere on a particular salary is to listen to the people who currently live there.

The Internet will always tell you you can live anywhere that is notorious for being expensive for cheap and it always boils down to this: Is it possible? Yes. Is it enjoyable and practical? Probably not.

 

[haxan7]

The price of everything is high and going up right now. It would be a terrible time to attempt such an experiment.

 

[SafeOrAlone]

If you have a significant other who also works, you can do it I suppose.

 

[Estellex]

The price of everything is high and going up right now. It would be a terrible time to attempt such an experiment.

I heard the job market is super hot over there or something lol.

 

[haxan7]

I heard the job market is super hot over there or something lol.

Nobody wants to work anywhere across the country because in a lot of low paying jobs, you can make as much sitting on your ass. It's hard to hire people every where.

 

[Deleted member 17706]

It all depends on how you define "comfortable."

You can definitely find a way to get by on $62k a year if you only have to worry about yourself and are debt free.

 

[AgentP]

Rent a room and use public transport, and no kids maybe.

 

[ntropy]

you have to earn about 5 times more than their trash cans

 

[pramod]

No.

 

[AlteredForms]

Get those food stamps ready.

 

[HellforLeather]

Why the fuck would you want to rent a room in a shared house?

EDIT: Also if that room is in the city for $1200/month, there is little chance its not disgusting/in a bad area/something wrong with it.

 

[ManaByte]

Rent: $1,200

 

[poppabk]

I think that $1000 is barely gonna cover even basic expenses once you include transportation, share of cable bill, share of electric, etc. Plus I doubt that $1000 room is gonna be in a nice place or a nice area or have nice roommates.

 

[ManaByte]

I think that $1000 is barely gonna cover even basic expenses once you include transportation, share of cable bill, share of electric, etc. Plus I doubt that $1000 room is gonna be in a nice place or a nice area or have nice roommates.

$1000 will get you a shared tent in the tenderloin.

 

[Blade2.0]

My friend makes 160k at Facebook and still feels low to him.

 

[DeepBreath87]

Comfort is relative. But renting a private room with a bunch of roommate in a flat doesn't fit my definition of comfortable living. I have a house. And garage. And a pretty big yard. I need some space. Especially for $1200 a month, which is relatively close to what I pay for a 4 bedroom house. So while I could probably survive in the circumstances OP laid out, I wouldn't call it comfortable.

 

[AmuroChan]

Yea, what you described is not comfortable living. Also, if you are choosing to live in SF or any other metropolitan city for that matter, your entertainment costs is going be a lot higher. When I was living in NYC some years back, I was spending around $800 a week just on entertainment and eating out.

 

[godhandiscen]

Most people think you need at least $100k/yr to live comfortably in San Francisco, but with a bit of budgeting, you can live with $62,000/yr and even $50k/yr. In a city like San Francisco, you won't need a car, so you can cut down a lot of expenses.

$62,000/yr is around $3,800 take home.

Rent: $1,200 (You can get a private room in a shared house for around $1,000 - $1,200 on Craiglist)
Living expenses: $1,000 (This is for utilities, hygiene, supplies, entertainment, eating out, etc.)
Savings: $1,600

$50,000/yr is around $3,000 take home.

Rent: $1,200
Living expenses: $1000
Savings: $800


What do you guys think?

You will never have a pet or be allowed to bring in guests or play loud music, or just be yourself at home.
For $1200 you can get your own place in many other cities.
Also, with $1000 of expenses per month you aren’t enjoying anything that makes SF worth living three. What is the point? Just one night out in SF is close to $100 between a meal and two drinks.

I heard the job market is super hot over there or something lol.

Yes, the job market is hot for jobs that require the sort of skills that merit >$150k/yr salary. Not for service workers or unskilled labor. Tons of service workers are getting their hours reduced lately due to health safety concerns or legislation that pushes stores to close early unless they want to get assaulted by robbers.

Look dude, I don’t want to kill your SF dreams, but being broke in SF is a shit feeling. You’ll feel subhuman there rubbing elbows with people who will make 3 times as much as you and still feel broke.

 

[TheMan]

Yea, what you described is not comfortable living. Also, if you are choosing to live in SF or any other metropolitan city for that matter, your entertainment costs is going be a lot higher. When I was living in NYC some years back, I was spending around $800 a week just on entertainment and eating out.

Lol what? that is a ridiculously high amount.

 

[SafeOrAlone]

My friend makes 160k at Facebook and still feels low to him.

His lifestyle is very high class then. I'm not saying SF is affordable, but that's a lot of dough.

 

[ripeavocado]

Most people think you need at least $100k/yr to live comfortably in San Francisco, but with a bit of budgeting, you can live with $62,000/yr and even $50k/yr. In a city like San Francisco, you won't need a car, so you can cut down a lot of expenses.

$62,000/yr is around $3,800 take home.

Rent: $1,200 (You can get a private room in a shared house for around $1,000 - $1,200 on Craiglist)
Living expenses: $1,000 (This is for utilities, hygiene, supplies, entertainment, eating out, etc.)
Savings: $1,600

$50,000/yr is around $3,000 take home.

Rent: $1,200
Living expenses: $1000
Savings: $800


What do you guys think?

You zoomers are delusional and act like economic cucks.


”comfortably” is not living a shared fucking house when you are supposed to buy a decent size house for your family and save lots of money for your pension.

Why do you have to rationalise your shitty living conditions instead of getting angry at politicians because your salaries are low and the cost of living crazy high?

 

[Dr.Guru of Peru]

You zoomers are delusional and act like economic cucks.


”comfortably” is not living a shared fucking house when you are supposed to buy a decent size house for your family and save lots of money for your pension.

Why so you have to rationalise your shitty living conditions instead of getting angry at politicians because your salaries are low and the cost of living crazy high?

Oh ok

 

[Unknown Soldier]

A private room in a shared house is not "living comfortably" and paying $1,200 is a joke.

 

[AmuroChan]

Lol what? that is a ridiculously high amount.

It's really not in cities like NY, especially when you're a 20-something making good money. I went out 4-5 times a week. Dinners were easily $150+ each time. I'm a sports fan so I went to a lot of Knicks and Rangers games. Those were like $200 a pop. Dating in the city is also expensive. You go to a Broadway show + dinner and that will set you back another few hundred bucks. It adds up a lot quicker than you think if you're an extrovert and trying to experience everything the city has to offer.

 

[MatrixReloaded101]

It's really not in cities like NY, especially when you're a 20-something making good money. I went out 4-5 times a week. Dinners were easily $150+ each time. I'm a sports fan so I went to a lot of Knicks and Rangers games. Those were like $200 a pop. Dating in the city is also expensive. You go to a Broadway show + dinner and that will set you back another few hundred bucks. It adds up a lot quicker than you think if you're an extrovert and trying to experience everything the city has to offer.

$800 a week is a lot man...

Regular people don't go to Broadway shows and sporting events every week. That's stuff you would usually do once every couple months if your making under $120k per year lol.

As for OP, instead of trying to live there which would probably be a horrible experience with a $62K salary. Why not just take a 2 week vacation there first and see if it would be worth it.

 

[lem0n]

You can exist, but that's not living comfortably. Unless you love being on a shoestring budget..

 

[AmuroChan]

$800 a week is a lot man...

Regular people don't go to Broadway shows and sporting events every week. That's stuff you would usually do once every couple months if your making under $120k per year lol.

As for OP, instead of trying to live there which would probably be a horrible experience with a $62K salary. Why not just take a 2 week vacation there first and see if it would be worth it.

Agreed, but most Manhattanites are not "regular" people making the US median income. Also, among my social circle in NYC back then, the $800 a week was on the low end. 120K is what some of my friends made in just end of year bonuses.

 

[McHuj]

I can’t imagine renting a private room in a flat. That’s like dorm living but maybe even worse. I’m too old for that shit.

 

[MrMephistoX]

SF? No fucking way without multiple room mates. Los Angeles definitely but obviously not in ritzy neighborhoods like Santa Monica or Beverly Hills but be prepared for a commute. Most houses in the entire Bay Area are well above $800k unless we’re talking outside of San Jose.

 

[TransTrender]

My base would have to be around $300K to make it equitable, but no, no you can't live comfortably in SF for $62K a year. As someone else already said, to get that close to "San Francisco" for that amount of money you're sharing a stoop and trading favors in the Tenderloin

 

[Rival]

If your definition of comfortable means scraping buy then sure. But you’ll never be able to really afford anything.

 

[Bernd Lauert]

You can survive, but you can't live comfortably, no.

I just did some quick maths and to live in SF at my current standard, I'd need over $3k a month for rent alone. Absolutely stupid.

 

[Chiggs]

I make 4x that and I moved out of Los Angeles two years ago because of how ridiculous it is.

Scenesters will find out the hard way about California, our great, dying disaster. And once you get in, it's awfully hard to get out.

 

[Blade2.0]

His lifestyle is very high class then. I'm not saying SF is affordable, but that's a lot of dough.

i mean, he's in a one bedroom and it costs a shit ton. didn't seem the most glamorous of lives.

 

[pramod]

Even if you can sort of scrape by, you will have nothing left to put into savings or retirement every month. Which is what you need to be doing during your working years.

160k would be enough to live comfortably renting as a single guy. But you will have to save like crazy for 20+ years to have any hope of buying a house here.

 

[SafeOrAlone]

i mean, he's in a one bedroom and it costs a shit ton. didn't seem the most glamorous of lives.

I make much less than half of that, pay nearly 2k in rent a month, and still save money. So I guess I’m skeptical.

I’d be curious to see his entertainment budget or potential car loans.

 

[Nester99]

Does not sound comfortable to me. Sometimes you need to not be comfortable to learn what you really value. Some want action some want space and freedom.

 

[Bl@de]

Rent a room and use public transport, and no kids maybe.

Sounds depressing.

 

[HellforLeather]

I make much less than half of that, pay nearly 2k in rent a month, and still save money. So I guess I’m skeptical.

I’d be curious to see his entertainment budget or potential car loans.

Less than half means you make $30k a year or less and you pay $2k a month x 12 = $24k which leaves you with a whopping $6k for food, car, entertainment, emergencies, unexpected expenses, etc for the year.

I guess if you can pull it off, bravo. This seems like an exceptionally precarious way to live financially.

 

[Torrent of Pork]

$1,200 a month gets you a 3br apartment, a house rental, or a generous mortgage payment where I live.

 

[Amory]

I live in Boston which is expensive but not SF tier. I don't think it'd be enjoyable to live even here on $62k a year. You'd either need several roommates, or you'd have to live in a crappy section of the city, or you'd have to forego a lot of your "fun" budget and put it into rent.

I guess if you were super frugal outside of living expenses you could do it.

 

[SafeOrAlone]

Less than half means you make $30k a year or less and you pay $2k a month x 12 = $24k which leaves you with a whopping $6k for food, car, entertainment, emergencies, unexpected expenses, etc for the year.

I guess if you can pull it off, bravo. This seems like an exceptionally precarious way to live financially.

"Less than half" of $160k wasn't meant to mean $30k.
That's less than1/5th of $160k.

I'm in the $50k-$60k range. Around $2k on rent a month, and I can save.

on $160k a year, he has to be able to save.

 

[HellforLeather]

"Less than half" of $160k wasn't meant to mean $30k.
That's like 1/5th of $160k.

My bad, I didnt see the post talking about the $160k Facebook guy. Sorry bud.

 

[EverythingsOverrated]

Right now I wouldn't attempt to live in SF unless you're making around 75k. Good luck being 1 of 100 people that all are trying to get one of those 1k rooms. Even if you're sharing a place, more likely than not, your rent is going to be at least 2k+ utilities.

62k is possible if everything breaks your way, but you definitely wouldn't be living comfortably

 

[Unknown Soldier]

At $62k a year you can just live in Stockton and commute 2 hours 1 way every day to get to SF.

Or you can live in literally any other state and get twice the standard of living or higher for the same money. The cost of everything is insane in California, unless you are working for a tech company in Silicon Valley or you do something for Hollywood you are basically spending more with less money for the same thing your whole life there.

 

[oagboghi2]

Most people think you need at least $100k/yr to live comfortably in San Francisco, but with a bit of budgeting, you can live with $62,000/yr and even $50k/yr. In a city like San Francisco, you won't need a car, so you can cut down a lot of expenses.

$62,000/yr is around $3,800 take home.

Rent: $1,200 (You can get a private room in a shared house for around $1,000 - $1,200 on Craiglist)
Living expenses: $1,000 (This is for utilities, hygiene, supplies, entertainment, eating out, etc.)
Savings: $1,600

$50,000/yr is around $3,000 take home.

Rent: $1,200
Living expenses: $1000
Savings: $800


What do you guys think?

This is laughable. When I live in SF I needed 2 extra roommates to rent a one bedroom in SF. 2800 a month. That isn’t living. That is barely getting by. Trying owning a home or raising a family. It’s practically impossible

 

[Pegasus Actual]

I can get it down to 40k if I'm hotbunking in section 8 housing with a junkie. PURE COMFORT!

 

[gamescoltsfan]

Sh0 nuff you’ll have 10k left over a year

 

[Soodanim]

This Tenderloin areas sounds pretty down to earth, I should look into it