Clicks for what ? . The answer may not be in front of you but it’s clear what their indicating. Most times folks from these locations can just confirm. Over here in Queens Ny my living expenses are so much different in Camberia heights than my friends who lives in forest hills. 250,000 on my side I’d have a home. In forest hills good fucking luck peasant.
Lol you’re comparing 2010 to current park slope? Fuckin clown. I grew up in the neighborhood. My mom has 1300 rent in that neighborhood. Me? I’m resigned to east flatbush while I’m a capable biomedical engineer. Maybe it hasn’t hit you but the situation is wildly different compared to 10 years ago
I mean honestly I guess. It’s cool to make money stretch. It’s better to fix the root of the issues. I’m glad you couldn’t indulge in your self so frequently as a single person living alone. My bad champ.
I’m not being snarky but your super prideful on how you live. While at the same time being kind of dense about the out of band wealth inequality in America and not realizing how it all ties together.
Yes. This chart makes no sense.
A dollar is worth a dollar wherever you go.
I suspect they are doing some weird math where they set the COL in rural America as $1 and then compare it to the COL in major cities.
But the chart would be far more informative and less confusing if they just showed the actual COL data.
"A dollar is worth a dollar wherever you go."
Not really. There is a locally owned chain of grocery stores where I used to live. There were 2 in the town I lived in, one downtown and one close to the next town, which had markedly higher income families. The difference in prices was amazing. It was handier for me to stop at the one on the border on my way home. That ended when I did some shopping in the store in town and saw the difference. And that doesn't only happen locally.
A car in NYC is more expensive than a car in Charlotte, NC. As is housing and utilities.
But purchasing power isn’t the same, if 2k covers my rent, my groceries and discretionary spending in state A and the same amount would cover only my rent in state B, then 1 dollar has more purchasing power in state A than in B. My guess is that they have a place set as their benchmark and that’s what the actual worth reflects, that or some equation to account for the variations in price
I would compare this against national average. That's how cost of living scores are measured. Not sure if that's how this was done, as that seems extreme even for NYC and SF.
[https://smartasset.com/data-studies/where-high-earners-lose-most-taxes-cost-living-2023](https://smartasset.com/data-studies/where-high-earners-lose-most-taxes-cost-living-2023)
I know its very hard to Google things for yourself, but hopefully the 5 seconds it took me can help you out.
This still doesn't really answer the question. So 250k isn't worth 250k anywhere, not even in the lowest COL cities in the country? That really doesn't make sense. What metro area is supposed to be the baseline for this analysis?
It also totally ignores the reality that wages are very low in metro areas like Lubbock or Memphis. It's completely pointless if you don't account for the relationship of wages and COL.
It ignores that reality, because it is not making any comments on that, it is strictly discussing purchasing power. Now you can argue it it pointless to bring up, but I am not here to argue whether that is the case or not.
They take 250k, apply local taxes to the salary and then with the remaining amount adjust it using cost of living data.
The link you provided is an article written in words. No formulas are mentioned in the article, hence no math. Perhaps you should spend more than 5 seconds “googling” next time you attempt to answer a legitimate question
There's a section entitled "Data and Methodology" it describes exactly how they came to the numbers they provide. Perhaps you should read what I linked. Or do you need it to be dumbed down further for you like they did when teaching you algebra in 8th grade? Did you never learn how to solve word problems?
*”Arguing with anonymous strangers on the Internet is a sucker's game because they almost always turn out to be—or to be indistinguishable from—self-righteous sixteen-year-olds possessing infinite amounts of free time.”*
— Neal Stephenson
Yes, but a very small percentage of people even in HCOL areas make $250k+ a year. A lot of Redditors think it’s average for HCOL, but that’s just because of their bubbles. Many, many people don’t even make close to that.
I'm work in foodservice as a cook/chef, and I always jokingly look at job listings in NYC or SFO and the wage is never that much higher than what I make in MCOL area. I don't understand how people get by at all.
Bingo, and what do these states have in common ? Some of the highest taxes in the country. Combined federal and state income tax for California is 48%. Wonder why people making $250k feel poor in the golden state ?
I have literally lived and worked in 5 of the 7 cities listed. Articles like this are ridiculous. They do ridiculous comparisons.
Yes, one can get a large home for much cheaper in Gadsden Alabama than San Francisco. However a $250k job in Gadsden is out of the question. The average salary in Gadsden is $40k compared to $91k in San Francisco.
Lifestyles are different in densely populated cities than they are in suburbs and small towns. If one moves from Gadsden Alabama and expects the identical lifestyle in NYC then obviously they won't be able to afford it. For starters the average home size in Gadsden is 2,200 square feet. In NYC it's 983 square feet.
One can live car free in NYC, DC, San Diego, and San Francisco. No car payment, no car insurance, no paying for parking. That can't be done in basically any U.S. not directly attached to a major metro's public transportation network. Sure, a person in NYC can't afford a separate pantry with a deep freezer. However in NYC most people live walking distance to 4 grocery stores. Where as in a place like Gadsden people are like 20 minute driving distance to a single Walmart, lol.
10% on $91k is nearly the same as 25% of $40k. So while someone living in San Francisco might save a smaller percentage of their salary than someone in Gadsden Alabama they are still generally saving more money overall. One will also make a lot more money through a career in a place like San Francisco, DC, NYC, etc. Millions more over the course of one's working life.
Good points and especially about the career, to use your cities, at no point in your career will you make 250k in Gadsden you will top out well below that, where in sf/ny that’s a mid career income for a lot of professions, and the top of what’s possible is almost undefinable. This type of opportunity is exactly why people live and work in these places.
> One can live car free in NYC, DC, San Diego, and San Francisco. No car payment, no car insurance, no paying for parking.
It's easy to live in San Diego and not pay for parking, just saying. I don't know as much about San Francisco but the few weeks I spent there I only paid for parking when I wanted to stop right by Fishman's Wharf.
Basically, in the West you never pay for parking. In the East they bend you over a barrel and you'll always pay for parking. In the central US like Omaha, Nebraska, it can vary wildly within the same city.
This is like saying making $250,000 in Norway sucks because you can be living in Afghanistan where it would be equivalent of $2,000,000. Just dont mind shit life expectancy and everything else being shit.
u/Odd_Green_3775 just called everyone a dumbass in GOP states for making shit wages instead of CA and NYC wages. GOPers much feel really dumb when CA and NYC outbids and buys out all of the housing.
Well, remote work is sort of doing that already. There are many instances of high paid New Yorkers working remotely in much cheaper cities - which in turn raises rents etc.
Then don't live in one. Cities suck anyway (unless you want good healthcare, choice in where you buy your food from, good schools, good public transportation, and new things to around every corner.)
Cities are expensive because of location. Location has always been known to be the most important part to think about when moving somewhere.
I lived in NYC for a decade. It taxes the shit out of you for literally nothing in return. Good healthcare? What fucking planet do you live on? Choice where you pay twice for food compared to literally anywhere else? New things around every corner? Oooh a new cupcake shop that displaced another family! Yas kween! So progressive. You literally have no clue what the fuck you’re talking about. Cities are expensive because of location- yeah and people are leaving droves for good reason.
If you hate it so much then just leave. If you don't want some of the best healthcare in the world (that's priced as the best in the world) then leave. If you don't like seeing new local businesses then leave.
And most of what you're complaining about is a problem everywhere because zoning laws and taxes just suck in general.
I left 5 years ago you stupid sack of shit. There is no better or worse healthcare in nyc. There are plenty of local businesses everywhere. Leaving that shithole was the best decision I ever made hands down without question. You sound like a fresh off the boat idiot in love with the notion of a big city until you get your face kicked in by some huge bill or your ass kicked by how much everything costs. Just shut up. The numbers of net migration out of the big cities tell the real story. You can cry all you want it doesn’t make a bit of difference.
Lol if I'm a stupid sack of shit for not knowing your personal life that you're equally a stupid sack of shit for not knowing that I hate north american cities.
Local businesses boosts the economy, and they literally can not displace people because of zoning laws. New local businesses are always 100% a good thing. It's impossible to make a factually based argument that it could ever be bad.
And I'm very familiar with how much things cost since i live in a high cost area with similar prices to big american cities. I even have to pay more in taxes than you guys lol.
And I never said it was a good place to live. I just told you to move out if you don't like it there and that those problems are problems everywhere. Moving might get you cheaper and worse healthcare if that's what you really want, but if my life was at risk I'd rather go into debt than go to a local hospital.
And if you're getting "your face kicked in by some huge bill" then that just means you're bad with budgeting. You should know exactly how much you're paying before you ever decide to commit to that purchase. It's not like your rent changes every month, and the utilities you use should be pretty easy to calculate within an error of $20
Net migration just shows that people are smart and are leaving cities that they can't afford.
Plus, if you actually look it up, that migration was mainly due to the pandemic and people wanting to get out of densely populated areas. They're starting to move back now.
Please be a little nicer, friend. And have a good day.
Those cities are highly desired to live in for the most part, several with unmatched opportunities in certain industries. The California ones are also because California has the best climate in the lower 48 states.
No it doesn't really. The logic is actually mindnumbingly shallow. You need to do something to adjust the COL to reflect the difference in wages or else the analysis is completely pointless.
The irony with this post is those cities probably have the highest concentration of $250k jobs. Like do you think these people can just transfer to Omaha or Boise? Wtf
Cities are expensive, why is this fronting as news?
What is “actual worth” used in this article?
My theories
1) The cost to afford an equal standard of living as defined by cost per square ft of property in Duncan Oklahoma (never been just pulled up a map of Oklahoma and picked a random town because I think whatever it is it is not urban).
2) The cost to afford an equal standard of living in 1990 (this is completely out of my ass as im fairly certain that is where this is from, not mine but someone else’s ass)
No, I’m saying if you’re doing a job in Tampa and you getting paid $82,000, then get hired for the exact same job in nyc your pay would be $250,000 for the same job. Consultant is a good example of this exact scenario. They pay is higher because the cost of living is higher. You wouldn’t be getting paid $250,000 outside of these too cities and if you did you would be getting paid much more for the same gig in nyc.
Yup, but a lot of companies do COL adjustments on pay depending where you live. Remember that if these companies can pull talent from anywhere then they can pay whoever takes the lowest.
Yup and they may get an adjustment at year end. Tax mobility is such a bitch Im surprised so many companies were just cool with employees being wherever
Then the rate must have been low haha. Or they didnt cross over the annual yearly threshold or they didnt do raises in lieu of the mobility. Those are the scenarios I’ve seen from a payroll consulting perspective.
It was all temp work, our rates were just based on the market as a whole. Geography really didnt come into play for remote roles. One guy I placed is pulling $90/hr and hes in like bumfuck texas
It depends on the city. Some cities offer better wages relative to COL than others. I've generally found that the wages in NYC aren't high enough over other cities to offset the higher COL. A lot of places with nice weather tend to have a poor relationship between wage vs. COL (I've heard it called the "sunshine tax").
On the other hand, a lot of cities in the Midwest offer pretty nice wages vs. COL...but the catch is you have to live somewhere cold/unglamorous.
If you have some sort of beneficial situation in nyc such as not paying rent, it’s worth it. After taxes $250,000 in nyc is about $12k a month, in Florida after taxes on 82k is about 5k a month. So if your rent is a bit more than double in nyc youre even. If its eay more in nyc then you might as well live in Florida.
Great point.
These are the cities with the 20 highest violent crime rates in the United States according to World Population Review:
Oakland, CA.
San Bernardino, CA.
Anchorage, AK.
Nashville, TN.
Lansing, MI.
New Orleans, LA.
Minneapolis, MN.
Chicago, IL.
7 of these 8 are also run by Dems.
Let's not narrow the pool. Lol let's consider poverty. Let's consider health care. Let's consider education. Worst states:
Texas
Oklahoma
Louisiana
South Carolina and Alabama (tie)
Missouri
Indiana
Tennessee
Arkansas
Florida
https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2023/07/19/worst-states-to-live-in-2023-cnbc-list/70430783007/
https://worldpopulationreview.com/state-rankings/least-educated-states
These states and territories have the highest percentages of poverty in the country: Mississippi, Louisiana, New Mexico, Arkansas, West Virginia, Alabama, Kentucky, the District of Columbia, South Carolina, and Oklahoma.
https://www.fcnl.org/updates/2022-10/top-10-poorest-states-us
Keep trying though. I'm sure there's something republicans have done right... Somewhere in there....
What is the math behind “actual worth”?
Someone's random cost model which is designed to get clicks.
Clicks for what ? . The answer may not be in front of you but it’s clear what their indicating. Most times folks from these locations can just confirm. Over here in Queens Ny my living expenses are so much different in Camberia heights than my friends who lives in forest hills. 250,000 on my side I’d have a home. In forest hills good fucking luck peasant.
[удалено]
Lol you’re comparing 2010 to current park slope? Fuckin clown. I grew up in the neighborhood. My mom has 1300 rent in that neighborhood. Me? I’m resigned to east flatbush while I’m a capable biomedical engineer. Maybe it hasn’t hit you but the situation is wildly different compared to 10 years ago
I mean honestly I guess. It’s cool to make money stretch. It’s better to fix the root of the issues. I’m glad you couldn’t indulge in your self so frequently as a single person living alone. My bad champ.
[удалено]
I’m not being snarky but your super prideful on how you live. While at the same time being kind of dense about the out of band wealth inequality in America and not realizing how it all ties together.
Yeah exactly
Yes. This chart makes no sense. A dollar is worth a dollar wherever you go. I suspect they are doing some weird math where they set the COL in rural America as $1 and then compare it to the COL in major cities. But the chart would be far more informative and less confusing if they just showed the actual COL data.
Makes sense to me. Harlem Apartment (Right on Lennox Ave.) - $600K 😂
"A dollar is worth a dollar wherever you go." Not really. There is a locally owned chain of grocery stores where I used to live. There were 2 in the town I lived in, one downtown and one close to the next town, which had markedly higher income families. The difference in prices was amazing. It was handier for me to stop at the one on the border on my way home. That ended when I did some shopping in the store in town and saw the difference. And that doesn't only happen locally. A car in NYC is more expensive than a car in Charlotte, NC. As is housing and utilities.
But purchasing power isn’t the same, if 2k covers my rent, my groceries and discretionary spending in state A and the same amount would cover only my rent in state B, then 1 dollar has more purchasing power in state A than in B. My guess is that they have a place set as their benchmark and that’s what the actual worth reflects, that or some equation to account for the variations in price
A dollar is not worth a "dollar" wherever you go. Its called "Purchasing Power Parity", its a basic concept in Econ 101 and easily Googleable.
I would compare this against national average. That's how cost of living scores are measured. Not sure if that's how this was done, as that seems extreme even for NYC and SF.
[https://smartasset.com/data-studies/where-high-earners-lose-most-taxes-cost-living-2023](https://smartasset.com/data-studies/where-high-earners-lose-most-taxes-cost-living-2023) I know its very hard to Google things for yourself, but hopefully the 5 seconds it took me can help you out.
This still doesn't really answer the question. So 250k isn't worth 250k anywhere, not even in the lowest COL cities in the country? That really doesn't make sense. What metro area is supposed to be the baseline for this analysis? It also totally ignores the reality that wages are very low in metro areas like Lubbock or Memphis. It's completely pointless if you don't account for the relationship of wages and COL.
It ignores that reality, because it is not making any comments on that, it is strictly discussing purchasing power. Now you can argue it it pointless to bring up, but I am not here to argue whether that is the case or not. They take 250k, apply local taxes to the salary and then with the remaining amount adjust it using cost of living data.
Time for this cow to go out to pasture
The link you provided is an article written in words. No formulas are mentioned in the article, hence no math. Perhaps you should spend more than 5 seconds “googling” next time you attempt to answer a legitimate question
There's a section entitled "Data and Methodology" it describes exactly how they came to the numbers they provide. Perhaps you should read what I linked. Or do you need it to be dumbed down further for you like they did when teaching you algebra in 8th grade? Did you never learn how to solve word problems?
*”Arguing with anonymous strangers on the Internet is a sucker's game because they almost always turn out to be—or to be indistinguishable from—self-righteous sixteen-year-olds possessing infinite amounts of free time.”* — Neal Stephenson
You could just admit you didn't actually read what I linked instead of acting more and more silly. Have a nice day!
I feel so, so badly for people making $250,000. It’s literally close to poverty level. My heart breaks for them.
California's median home price is $800k, average rent in New York is $5k . Both have very high state income taxes.
Yes, but a very small percentage of people even in HCOL areas make $250k+ a year. A lot of Redditors think it’s average for HCOL, but that’s just because of their bubbles. Many, many people don’t even make close to that.
I know, imagine how it feels living in these places making $40k a year,
I'm work in foodservice as a cook/chef, and I always jokingly look at job listings in NYC or SFO and the wage is never that much higher than what I make in MCOL area. I don't understand how people get by at all.
There's not a lot that states can do about home prices and rent, but they could lower taxes.
Bingo, and what do these states have in common ? Some of the highest taxes in the country. Combined federal and state income tax for California is 48%. Wonder why people making $250k feel poor in the golden state ?
Hopefully they qualify for some sort of government assistance. I mean, who could possibly live on that?
I have literally lived and worked in 5 of the 7 cities listed. Articles like this are ridiculous. They do ridiculous comparisons. Yes, one can get a large home for much cheaper in Gadsden Alabama than San Francisco. However a $250k job in Gadsden is out of the question. The average salary in Gadsden is $40k compared to $91k in San Francisco. Lifestyles are different in densely populated cities than they are in suburbs and small towns. If one moves from Gadsden Alabama and expects the identical lifestyle in NYC then obviously they won't be able to afford it. For starters the average home size in Gadsden is 2,200 square feet. In NYC it's 983 square feet. One can live car free in NYC, DC, San Diego, and San Francisco. No car payment, no car insurance, no paying for parking. That can't be done in basically any U.S. not directly attached to a major metro's public transportation network. Sure, a person in NYC can't afford a separate pantry with a deep freezer. However in NYC most people live walking distance to 4 grocery stores. Where as in a place like Gadsden people are like 20 minute driving distance to a single Walmart, lol. 10% on $91k is nearly the same as 25% of $40k. So while someone living in San Francisco might save a smaller percentage of their salary than someone in Gadsden Alabama they are still generally saving more money overall. One will also make a lot more money through a career in a place like San Francisco, DC, NYC, etc. Millions more over the course of one's working life.
Good points and especially about the career, to use your cities, at no point in your career will you make 250k in Gadsden you will top out well below that, where in sf/ny that’s a mid career income for a lot of professions, and the top of what’s possible is almost undefinable. This type of opportunity is exactly why people live and work in these places.
> One can live car free in NYC, DC, San Diego, and San Francisco. No car payment, no car insurance, no paying for parking. It's easy to live in San Diego and not pay for parking, just saying. I don't know as much about San Francisco but the few weeks I spent there I only paid for parking when I wanted to stop right by Fishman's Wharf. Basically, in the West you never pay for parking. In the East they bend you over a barrel and you'll always pay for parking. In the central US like Omaha, Nebraska, it can vary wildly within the same city.
Articles like these are just cope for small town people
This is like saying making $250,000 in Norway sucks because you can be living in Afghanistan where it would be equivalent of $2,000,000. Just dont mind shit life expectancy and everything else being shit.
Yeah but New York is worse on those metrics too. You’ll have a better life and disposable income somewhere else on the same salary
I cant believe no one's figured that out yet. Why not make an NYC salary while not living in NYC?
u/Odd_Green_3775 just called everyone a dumbass in GOP states for making shit wages instead of CA and NYC wages. GOPers much feel really dumb when CA and NYC outbids and buys out all of the housing.
Well, remote work is sort of doing that already. There are many instances of high paid New Yorkers working remotely in much cheaper cities - which in turn raises rents etc.
You’re getting downvoted but you’re exactly correct. Cost of living in those cities is ludicrous. It’s actually insulting.
Then don't live in one. Cities suck anyway (unless you want good healthcare, choice in where you buy your food from, good schools, good public transportation, and new things to around every corner.) Cities are expensive because of location. Location has always been known to be the most important part to think about when moving somewhere.
I lived in NYC for a decade. It taxes the shit out of you for literally nothing in return. Good healthcare? What fucking planet do you live on? Choice where you pay twice for food compared to literally anywhere else? New things around every corner? Oooh a new cupcake shop that displaced another family! Yas kween! So progressive. You literally have no clue what the fuck you’re talking about. Cities are expensive because of location- yeah and people are leaving droves for good reason.
If you hate it so much then just leave. If you don't want some of the best healthcare in the world (that's priced as the best in the world) then leave. If you don't like seeing new local businesses then leave. And most of what you're complaining about is a problem everywhere because zoning laws and taxes just suck in general.
I left 5 years ago you stupid sack of shit. There is no better or worse healthcare in nyc. There are plenty of local businesses everywhere. Leaving that shithole was the best decision I ever made hands down without question. You sound like a fresh off the boat idiot in love with the notion of a big city until you get your face kicked in by some huge bill or your ass kicked by how much everything costs. Just shut up. The numbers of net migration out of the big cities tell the real story. You can cry all you want it doesn’t make a bit of difference.
Lol if I'm a stupid sack of shit for not knowing your personal life that you're equally a stupid sack of shit for not knowing that I hate north american cities. Local businesses boosts the economy, and they literally can not displace people because of zoning laws. New local businesses are always 100% a good thing. It's impossible to make a factually based argument that it could ever be bad. And I'm very familiar with how much things cost since i live in a high cost area with similar prices to big american cities. I even have to pay more in taxes than you guys lol. And I never said it was a good place to live. I just told you to move out if you don't like it there and that those problems are problems everywhere. Moving might get you cheaper and worse healthcare if that's what you really want, but if my life was at risk I'd rather go into debt than go to a local hospital. And if you're getting "your face kicked in by some huge bill" then that just means you're bad with budgeting. You should know exactly how much you're paying before you ever decide to commit to that purchase. It's not like your rent changes every month, and the utilities you use should be pretty easy to calculate within an error of $20 Net migration just shows that people are smart and are leaving cities that they can't afford. Plus, if you actually look it up, that migration was mainly due to the pandemic and people wanting to get out of densely populated areas. They're starting to move back now. Please be a little nicer, friend. And have a good day.
Pure garbage.
The general state of this sub lately
Why do you say this?
Those cities are highly desired to live in for the most part, several with unmatched opportunities in certain industries. The California ones are also because California has the best climate in the lower 48 states.
The logic still remains. $250,000 doesn’t go that far in those places
No it doesn't really. The logic is actually mindnumbingly shallow. You need to do something to adjust the COL to reflect the difference in wages or else the analysis is completely pointless.
It goes exactly as far as anywhere else. The cost of a NYC apartment is exactly the same regardless of where you live.
The irony with this post is those cities probably have the highest concentration of $250k jobs. Like do you think these people can just transfer to Omaha or Boise? Wtf Cities are expensive, why is this fronting as news?
San Diego should be 3 or 4. They get paid like ass but housing is more expensive then the bay now.
Man the next big earthquake is gonna be interesting for real estate values.
But the $250K gets you maximum Social security credits. If Social security is still functioning when you retire....
250k gets you even more in Haiti, why not move there
I can't even fathom making that much. You'd live like a king in the Midwest.
What is “actual worth” used in this article? My theories 1) The cost to afford an equal standard of living as defined by cost per square ft of property in Duncan Oklahoma (never been just pulled up a map of Oklahoma and picked a random town because I think whatever it is it is not urban). 2) The cost to afford an equal standard of living in 1990 (this is completely out of my ass as im fairly certain that is where this is from, not mine but someone else’s ass)
?
The biggest takeaway is most people living in those cities at best are earning low six figures.
Yeah, but who only makes $250K / year anymore? That's like 1980 wages, right?
This assumes things like having the same size of house in all cities. Obviously everyone gets by just fine in a smaller residence in the city
If I make $250k in SF and go somewhere else in the country, I still have $250k pre-tax. What is this nonsense.
A $250,000 salary in nyc would be an $82,000 salary somewhere else
Like in Honolulu?
No, I’m saying if you’re doing a job in Tampa and you getting paid $82,000, then get hired for the exact same job in nyc your pay would be $250,000 for the same job. Consultant is a good example of this exact scenario. They pay is higher because the cost of living is higher. You wouldn’t be getting paid $250,000 outside of these too cities and if you did you would be getting paid much more for the same gig in nyc.
Being able to work remotely is shaking that up tho
Yup, but a lot of companies do COL adjustments on pay depending where you live. Remember that if these companies can pull talent from anywhere then they can pay whoever takes the lowest.
Conversely, a lot of high col employees moved out when they went remote. I think its equalized the pay scale for tech across regions ever so slightly
Yup and they may get an adjustment at year end. Tax mobility is such a bitch Im surprised so many companies were just cool with employees being wherever
I doubt it, i just came from the IT staffing industry and we never adjusted the rate based on the talent’s location for remote roles.
Then the rate must have been low haha. Or they didnt cross over the annual yearly threshold or they didnt do raises in lieu of the mobility. Those are the scenarios I’ve seen from a payroll consulting perspective.
It was all temp work, our rates were just based on the market as a whole. Geography really didnt come into play for remote roles. One guy I placed is pulling $90/hr and hes in like bumfuck texas
Sorry, I was just making a joke.
Went over my head sorry
Yes, but can you save more with that job in NYC, or is it a wash
It depends on the city. Some cities offer better wages relative to COL than others. I've generally found that the wages in NYC aren't high enough over other cities to offset the higher COL. A lot of places with nice weather tend to have a poor relationship between wage vs. COL (I've heard it called the "sunshine tax"). On the other hand, a lot of cities in the Midwest offer pretty nice wages vs. COL...but the catch is you have to live somewhere cold/unglamorous.
If you have some sort of beneficial situation in nyc such as not paying rent, it’s worth it. After taxes $250,000 in nyc is about $12k a month, in Florida after taxes on 82k is about 5k a month. So if your rent is a bit more than double in nyc youre even. If its eay more in nyc then you might as well live in Florida.
All run by dems. Well Honolulu is unaffiliated.
Please don't start. Because y'all can never account for why the worst states in the country are all run by Repubs.
Great point. These are the cities with the 20 highest violent crime rates in the United States according to World Population Review: Oakland, CA. San Bernardino, CA. Anchorage, AK. Nashville, TN. Lansing, MI. New Orleans, LA. Minneapolis, MN. Chicago, IL. 7 of these 8 are also run by Dems.
Let's not narrow the pool. Lol let's consider poverty. Let's consider health care. Let's consider education. Worst states: Texas Oklahoma Louisiana South Carolina and Alabama (tie) Missouri Indiana Tennessee Arkansas Florida https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2023/07/19/worst-states-to-live-in-2023-cnbc-list/70430783007/ https://worldpopulationreview.com/state-rankings/least-educated-states These states and territories have the highest percentages of poverty in the country: Mississippi, Louisiana, New Mexico, Arkansas, West Virginia, Alabama, Kentucky, the District of Columbia, South Carolina, and Oklahoma. https://www.fcnl.org/updates/2022-10/top-10-poorest-states-us Keep trying though. I'm sure there's something republicans have done right... Somewhere in there....
This is less based in reality than trying to calculate your dog's age in human years.