AirVisual is a solid app, a bit more info than EPA Airnow or Smokesense but those are also decent for tracking AQI year round. best of luck with your choice
AirVisual is a solid app, a bit more info than EPA Airnow or Smokesense but those are also decent for tracking AQI year round. best of luck with your choice
95% of Seattle is an eyesore, complete sh*thole of a city
Houses and condos cost over $1000/sqft now
Ratio of men to women is 13:10
Rains 300+ days per year
Smokey from forest fires (worse air quality than Bejing) for 1 month of the year
Museums and food are subpar
Lots of petty crime: your car will be broken in to a few times per year (even if you have a parking garage)
The locals are awful, much more in-your-face than San Franciso libs (tons more bumper stickers and yard signs here), very smug and pseudo-intellectual
State education system is medicore
Parks are few and small
Mountains for skiing are not as good as Colorado, Utah, etc.
State parks, trails and mountains are overcrowded
Traffic is worse than any other city in the U.S.
fact check of Jamin's post above finds numerous incorrect assertions including sf price of home/condos, state of the parks relative to other cities, avg. rainfall per year as a number of days, to name a few.
jamin wrote:
95% of Seattle is an eyesore, complete sh*thole of a city
Houses and condos cost over $1000/sqft now
Ratio of men to women is 13:10
Rains 300+ days per year
Smokey from forest fires (worse air quality than Bejing) for 1 month of the year
Museums and food are subpar
Lots of petty crime: your car will be broken in to a few times per year (even if you have a parking garage)
The locals are awful, much more in-your-face than San Franciso libs (tons more bumper stickers and yard signs here), very smug and pseudo-intellectual
State education system is medicore
Parks are few and small
Mountains for skiing are not as good as Colorado, Utah, etc.
State parks, trails and mountains are overcrowded
Traffic is worse than any other city in the U.S.
I pretty much agree with everything you listed. So why are you still there?
el rancho wrote:
jamin wrote:
95% of Seattle is an eyesore, complete sh*thole of a city
Houses and condos cost over $1000/sqft now
Ratio of men to women is 13:10
Rains 300+ days per year
Smokey from forest fires (worse air quality than Bejing) for 1 month of the year
Museums and food are subpar
Lots of petty crime: your car will be broken in to a few times per year (even if you have a parking garage)
The locals are awful, much more in-your-face than San Franciso libs (tons more bumper stickers and yard signs here), very smug and pseudo-intellectual
State education system is medicore
Parks are few and small
Mountains for skiing are not as good as Colorado, Utah, etc.
State parks, trails and mountains are overcrowded
Traffic is worse than any other city in the U.S.
I pretty much agree with everything you listed. So why are you still there?
So that he can keep complaining, which is his favorite and main activity.
Based on your writing, you sound young / early in your career. Now is an important time for you to focus on that. You do not want to stagnate. I agree that running is still important, but I would not make a career decision based on running trails. I would choose whichever job offers the better combination of marketable experience and potential future growth. $25k over the next year might sound like a lot, but you need to think 3-5 years out (i.e. by then you might be at $250k in your $135k starting job, and much lower in your $160k starting job). A key factor to analyze in that decision is your boss. Is s/he a proven start and have a proven record of developing and promoting young talent?
I hope this helps.
Banana Bread wrote:
Imagine if you took 135 and lived in Ethiopia. That would be amazing. Your money would go way more further there. Bekele is Ethiophian.
He is quite literally Ethiopian
The most important thing to consider. Seattle has Seahawks fans. Bay depending on what part is Raiders (who will be disappearing when their team moves to Vegas) and 49er fans. Choosing the Bay area couldn't be more obvious.
don't live in Seattle. are you kidding?
for $100K more... yeah ok put your head down and save that extra and get another job in three years in a better city.
but for 30K? people rag on SF but it is a world class city. Weather, culture, nightlife, people are nicer, etc.
Seattle is a dump.
Seattle.
You're getting more money and you'll need that to afford a house in the greater Seattle area. Traffic is bad but maybe a bit better than in the Bay area.
The 3-4 weeks of forest fires this summer was terrible. The haze was real bad and the air unhealthy. Last summer was bad too but not quite as long. Is this the new normal for the western Washington region?
I like them both but the extra $25k would be the deciding factor for me assuming the jobs are relatively similar as far as benefits, hours, and promotion potential.
I was born in Mountain View.
Hope this information helps you to make a wise decision.
More than I ever made. I live in Chicago. I d go with Sesttle
No one here is even considering taxes. In Seattle, you will be taxed at only 26% of your income (2018 Federal Tax Brackets have the cutoff at just over 157k, so you could drop into the 24% bracket with a decent contribution to a non-Roth 401k/IRA)...There is no state income tax in Washington, so you would roughly clear 122k a year (at a 26% tax rate...as I said, you could easily move into the 24% rate which would net you 125k a year).
In San Francisco, not only will your living expenses be higher, but you will also be taxed at 24% Federal plus 9.3% State Income Taxes, meaning you will only clear roughly 91k. That's a huge chunk of money, especially with the increased cost of living associated with living near San Francisco.
Zillow expert wrote:
135K or 160k doesn't get you far in both places.
I know it's the West coast but did anyone else read this as ridiculous, even by LR standards?
Use the $160k Seattle offer to get the Bay Area company to up their offer to $165k. Tell them you have the other offer. Problem solved.
You’re welcome.
1. commute
2. working hours
3. a-hole level of your boss
any of those three can make or break you
pay is nothing by comparison if those three are out of whack
The OP didn't specify what his priorities are.
If he wants "bang for your buck" in terms of city living lifestyle, San Franciso is way better.
If he wants to save money -- sure, Seattle is better.
Typical kraker dilemma