
Which Occupations Are Priced Out of Homeownership? - scottporad
http://www.estately.com/occupation-real-estate-affordability
======
stegosaurus
In SF/London/etc?

All of them. 'Occupations' don't get you a middle class lifestyle any more.
You fundamentally have to play the capitalist game and maximise your income,
you can't just 'do a good job' any more.

Look at London. A family home in zone 6? ~400K. 20% deposit, that's 320K ->
~90K annual income required to buy it.

Ninety thousand pounds. I don't think people really 'get' how much this is.
It's 7x minimum wage.

It's not a wage that you work hard and get, it's limited to an exclusive
elite. You might be able to manage that, I might be able to manage that, but
the city as a whole is knackered.

I don't think people understand what it means that massive swathes of the
population can never own a home, or can never save after paying for their
rent.

You're saying that teachers, bus drivers, shopkeepers, don't deserve anything
other than to go to work over and over again.

It's a total bloody disaster. I hear people moaning that tube drivers earn
50K. 50K! These guys run the god damn city, without them you couldn't get to
work, and you want to pay them so little that they're unable to ever buy a
studio flat.

What's the solution? I will work hard and earn lots. Everyone who can't do
that is knackered. That sounds like a reasonable way to run a society - winner
takes all, everyone else gets shafted.

~~~
return0
Why don't people move? Haven't they learned to vote with their money?

> These guys run the god damn city, without them you couldn't get to work

I don't know, there are cities where there aren't even drivers in the metro.

~~~
tamana
People want to live there because high paying jobs are there, but then housing
knocks the wind of them.

------
kqr2
Actually if you are a firefighter in San Francisco, you can qualify for a
special downpayment assistance loan of up to $200,000 that requires no
payments for 30 years

[http://sfmohcd.org/first-responders-down-payment-
assistance-...](http://sfmohcd.org/first-responders-down-payment-assistance-
loan-program-frdalp)

Also starting salary for SFFD is from $72,670.00 - 112,190.00/year which
doesn't include overtime.

[https://www.jobaps.com/SF/sup/bulpreview.asp?R1=CCT&R2=H002&...](https://www.jobaps.com/SF/sup/bulpreview.asp?R1=CCT&R2=H002&R3=900310)

Firefighters are actually some of the highest paid city workers. In 2013, 31
of the top 50 earners were from the SFFD.

[http://www.sfgate.com/bayarea/article/S-F-Fire-Dept-
dominate...](http://www.sfgate.com/bayarea/article/S-F-Fire-Dept-dominates-
list-of-highest-paid-5085237.php)

~~~
TuringNYC
I was surprised to see that as well. Forget about highest-paid -- just the
stability of a government job allows one to afford homes. I might make more as
a developer, but i have no idea when i'll be laid-off and how long i might be
out of work. That forces me to stretch far less than a firefighter or teacher.

~~~
davidiach
You need to take into account that firefighters sometimes get injured and even
die doing their jobs. Getting laid off isn't the only way to lose their job.

~~~
runamok
Very true. Here is a long treatise on the subject with some sources.
[http://www.iaff1775.org/the-truth-about-firefighter-
retireme...](http://www.iaff1775.org/the-truth-about-firefighter-retirement-
and-pensions)

Clearly it is not a balanced article (since it comes from a FireFighters
Union) but it definitely made some good points.

------
usaar333
Would really like to see some methodology here. I find it extremely hard to
believe that programmers can only afford 4% of SF's housing stock, but doctors
can do 41%.

Sure doctors might make an average of $175k while programmers pull $100k, but
by the time the doctor exits residency, the programmer will have earned about
$400k+ post-tax while the doctor is $200k in debt. It'll take quite some time
(12+ years) for a post-tax salary difference of $36k to make up that
imbalance.

~~~
superuser2
>programmers pull $100k

My understanding is $110k is an unsurprising entry-level salary; people who
are mid-career would be making quite a bit more.

~~~
gambiting
A bit off topic, but I just cannot grasp those US salaries for programmers.
Even for UK, that would be insanely high, with the exception of maybe london,
but if you work anywhere else the number is 1/3 of this. Average junior
programmer salaries in the North East of England are around ~$35k/year, and I
know seniors with 15-20 years of experience and they make 60k pounds/year(so
~85k USD/year). I have friends working as C++ programmers in Krakow, Poland,
and they make ~$20k/year(bear in mind that it's extremely good salary there,
as houses rarely cost more than $100k, in fact you could buy land and build a
house for less). I just cannot grasp how an entry level position would pay
$100k/year.

~~~
seren
It is hard to compare European salaries to their US counterpart. You have to
take account they have much less holidays on average, you have also some sort
of "free healthcare" that is not tied to your job, a state pension plan,
access to some cheap higher level education for your children.

In my country, between what is paid by the employer and what I actually get
there is a factor of 2 to pay for all the "free" service aforementioned.

~~~
refurb
I would be careful with that comparison. Many higher-wage US jobs get much
more vacation than the minimum 2 weeks, health insurance is paid for by the
company (employee only pay ~10% of premium), you get a pension (Social
Security) and you're kids can go to a state school with subsidized tuition
(albetit, nowhere near as cheap as Europe).

~~~
eli_gottlieb
> Many higher-wage US jobs get much more vacation than the minimum 2 weeks

[citation needed]. Most high-level American techies I've met get two weeks and
take less.

~~~
bryondowd
Just as anecdotal as yours, but around here, the standard for new hires seems
to be 14 days of PTO per year, which gets increased by about a week after a
few years of service and again a few years after that. That's with the
contractor companies working with the FAA outside Atlantic City, NJ. So,
having and using 3-4 weeks isn't too uncommon. Don't know how that compares to
elsewhere, but my last non-contractor job closer to Philly had a similar
breakdown.

Edit: Oh, and it's probably worth noting that starting salary is wayyyy lower
than SF, or even other major metro areas. Ballpark $50k. Balanced by the
stability, benefits, lower cost of living, and lack of traffic/commute.

~~~
cableshaft
...> 2 weeks [after a few years of service at the one job].

Most tech people, especially younger people, have to switch jobs every one or
two years, roughly, in order to get a proper compensation boost and career
growth, so they never accumulate the years at one company that lead to the 4-5
weeks that some people get.

Like at my current job, there's several people here who have been here for 5
years and have 4-5 weeks of PTO accumulated. I've been here for less than a
year, so I have 2 weeks, even though I have more career experience than quite
a few of the people here.

Also, due to some recent changes that screwed with benefits quite a bit, I'm
not sure I see myself staying here for much longer than maybe two years max
(we'll see, there's a pretty good team, nice boss, and perfect commute, so I'm
in no hurry), so I'm probably not going to see any extra PTO out of that
either.

~~~
bryondowd
Interesting. I have heard of that being a problem here as well, with each
contract change/new company resetting seniority (even to do the same exact
job) and keeping your annual PTO allotment. However, I don't know if my
current situation is special, but I'm in the process of negotiating a move to
a new company and was able to get them to agree to honor my service with my
current company toward PTO seniority. So, it may just be something you need to
fight for, that most people don't think to fight for?

------
falsestprophet
Here is some context that all of these discussions about life as a software
developer in San Francisco need.

There are about 243k software developers/programmers in the San Francisco-
Oakland-Fremont, CA area: ~12% of the workforce.

There are about 46k software developers/programmers that make over ~$145,000
in the San Francisco-Oakland-Fremont, CA area: ~2% of the workforce.

 _These numbers seem crazy. Are developers /programmers really 12% of the
workforce in the SF area?_

From the Bureau of Labor Statistics as of May 2014:

    
    
      Computer Programmers
      San Francisco-Oakland-Fremont, CA
      Total employment: 48,040
    
      10%ile: $48,040	
      25%ile: $71,460	
      50%ile: $97,050	
      75&ile: $124,020	
      90%ile: $147,970
      
      Software Developers, Applications
      San Francisco-Oakland-Fremont, CA
      Total employment: 70,110
    
      10%ile: $70,110	
      25%ile: $87,440	
      50%ile: $114,700	
      75&ile: $144,320	
      90%ile: $173,130
      
      Software Developers, Systems Software
      San Francisco-Oakland-Fremont, CA
      Total employment: 80,480
    
      10%ile: $80,480	
      25%ile: $94,320	
      50%ile: $118,720	
      75&ile: $146,620	
      90%ile: $171,140
      
      Web Developers
      San Francisco-Oakland-Fremont, CA
      Total employment: 45,320
    
      10%ile: $45,320	
      25%ile: $64,460	
      50%ile: $87,540	
      75&ile: $119,780	
      90%ile: $145,130

~~~
tomkinstinch
Thanks for posting BLS numbers. For all of the comments mentioning
aspirational high salaries, the BLS numbers give a much more accurate view,
albeit with a minor time delay.

------
hacknat
Let's compare median national wages to local home prices. Look at the story we
can tell!

Looking at median wage data can be deceiving. For example, doctors salaries
are bi modal. A lot of people making 40k/year then all of a sudden they jump
up to 180k. I would make the argument that software engineering is probably
logarithmic from 90k, with very few people making over 140k. Is the median
salary for a "programmer" 92k? Yes. Is that fact useful in the prediction of
home ownership for certain local markets? I doubt it.

Obviously it's hard for a median wage teacher to but a home by themselves in
SF, but I question this methodology.

~~~
jasonkostempski
From these numbers, it looks like it be hard for a dual income
doctor/astronaut couple to own a home in SF.

------
bshimmin
I'll be honest and say my key learning here was that astronauts don't earn all
that much money (and presumably none of them are homeowners in SF!).

~~~
craigds
Me too. I guess I figured astronauts must get risk pay. If you're an astronaut
you have a sizable likelihood of dying on the job.

Then again, this is probably just supply and demand. Every kid growing up
wants to be an astronaut, and very few get to.

~~~
poof131
Astronauts aren’t doing it for the money. The government doesn’t pay it’s
people well for risk. Contracting with the government is much more lucrative
in this regards. Military can often pay less than $50k a year[1] to people
taking a ton of risk when a contractor taking significantly less risk is
making $1000 a day. This is one reason privatizing so much of the military is
corrosive.

[http://www.militaryrates.com/military-pay-
charts-e1_e5_2016](http://www.militaryrates.com/military-pay-
charts-e1_e5_2016)

~~~
icebraining
Why is that corrosive? Increasing the cost of going to war sounds great to me.

~~~
bryondowd
It would be great, if that cost reigned in our willingness to go to war.
However, it just provides even more incentive for all the people making money
off it directly or indirectly to support the war.

------
ajeet_dhaliwal
If they add London everyone would be at or close to 0%. Total disaster here,
need to plan an exit. You must have a large inheritance to buy or not have a
typical occupation, ie millionaire busines owner.

~~~
dijit
I moved away from london, I'm lucky that I don't have family there or an
emotional attachment to the city itself.

I feel bad for the others, I made an above average wage and chomped over 60%
of my salary in rent (+20% in bills and taxes), even if I could have afforded
to buy when moving there initially, the rate of incline was so great that
after 1 year I was completely unable to buy a studio apartment.

Crazy.

There are even anecdotes about how "my home earns more than I do". :|

~~~
edandersen
London is very much overdue a correction.

~~~
ajeet_dhaliwal
Unless it's a 50%+ drop in prices it's going to make little difference to
affordability for the occupations listed on this site (fire fighters,
programmers, even doctors etc). Remember even if you are some high salary like
£100,000 you can only borrow 3.5 times that. That buys nothing a family can
live in here. The only option is to move, inherit a fortune or become a
millionaire.

------
return0
I fail to understand why in this hyperconnected age real estate prices are
going up. There is no need to be in a big city anyway, the prices are absurd,
houses are tiny, and immigration/globalization has made most cities look
alike. Or is it because the rich have thrown their money at it, inflating
prices?

~~~
zanny
It is mostly the later - phantom "investment" in real estate, where people
store wealth and own empty property rather than buy precious metals or
actually invest it.

But as we trend towards automation, more and more jobs are disappearing. In
many areas, there is not enough density of both people and work to be able to
regularly switch jobs as your current one is obsoleted or downsized. People
trend towards cities if you want reliable income - jobs everywhere are going
away, and the more you are paid the greater the pressure to eliminate your
position. You need to be somewhere where, while the unemployment figures /
workforce participation figures aren't great in cities, the density means
there are more chances to get a job there than elsewhere when your current one
inevitably discards you.

The other thing is that mobility is a luxury. You can be rich enough to
relocate - paying down payments on houses and apartments, moving or buying
furniture, going through the _incredible_ amount of state bureaucracy
involving changing address and all necessary documents, and for those who are
working poor you don't have the time or savings to do it. The other option is
abandon everything, damn the state bureaucracy, and just jump on a bus and go
somewhere you think work is plentiful, and then find out nobody will hire you
without paperwork and proof of residence.

It is not a solvable problem where you just tell the working poor how to
succeed, because everything is systemically rigged to exploit them and keep
them in the condition they are in now.

------
exolymph
1) toggle to San Francisco 2) weep

~~~
raverbashing
3) Work remotely from Detroit

~~~
xiaoma
The vast, vast majority of companies in SF are uninterested in hiring remote
software engineers.

~~~
ZeroGravitas
I guess if you were the kind of company that would hire remote software
engineers, then you'd have very little reason to have the rest of your
operation in expensive SF either, so there's a weird chicken-and-egg loop
there.

There seems to be enough money sloshing around that you'd think someone would
be arbitraging it successfully and employing rockstar programmers that live in
cheap shacks around the country/globe, but apparently for the mainstream
that's not considered viable.

~~~
eitally
This happens more than you think. There are plenty of ex-tech engineers who
started their own contract dev companies with just a couple of local (SFBA)
folks who run things and assign work to inexpensive programmers, designers,
etc elsewhere in the country/world.

Typical current contract dev rate in the SFBA is in the $250/hr range
(negotiable down to $150-175/hr for larger contracts).

~~~
raverbashing
At those prices this is the yearly salary for a lot of people

------
atemerev
Also, an interesting observation: a "computer programmer" (presumably with
median income) will be able to afford 100% of homes in Detroit! Each one of
them!

------
huherto
Most people are focused on salaries. May be salaries wouldn't be such a big
deal if houses weren't that expensive.

\- It is killing the middle class. And the lower class is hopeless.

\- Beyond individuals, it makes the country as a whole less competitive.
(Higher costs).

\- It affects consumption. (Less available income)

\- And hardly anyone is benefiting. Since you cannot sell your house to
realize gains. (You still need a place to live)

Are we ready to start a conversation about a Land Tax ?

~~~
JauntTrooper
I think urban housing demand is relatively inelastic, so I would worry that a
sizable portion of a land tax would get pushed down to renters via higher rent
and exacerbate the problem of high housing costs.

------
mytochar
What about when you have student loans? That reduces your effective income and
makes it more difficult to afford a home. Same with a car.

------
imh
I'm curious how they arrived at affordability as a function of income. I'm
surprised they weren't transparent about that.

------
hackerweb
I'd love to be able to hire developers for $92K/year in SF, but these numbers
are completely off base for average salary. Even offering $160-200K (plus
options), I probably lose half my recruiting battles to big companies offering
total compensation in the range of $450-800K/year.

Who do you think is making housing so unaffordable? It's the tens of thousands
of software developers earning $200K-800K/year!

Of course, there is an above-average number of super-rich entrepreneurs in SF,
but that's still only a tiny fraction of the population compared to
developers. Moreover, the city makes it virtually impossible to combine
apartments or houses into mega-mansions, so even the super rich don't consume
that many housing units per-capita in SF.

~~~
ryandrake
This is the most ridiculous and exaggerated comment I've read here for quite a
while. The median salary for a software engineer in SF is $103K [1][2]. If you
are offering $160-200K, you are not losing out on half your candidates due to
salary. And $450-800K is ridiculous--probably 5-6 standard deviations into the
salary tail. If you are seriously offering 200K for a software engineering
position and having trouble, please look up my LinkedIn profile (shouldn't be
hard, check the username) and hit me up.

These "salary" threads that pop up on HN every so often are so silly.

A: Software Engineers make like $120K on average!

B: Naahh, I heard they make more like $150K.

C: I know someone at Google that makes $200K. Software Engineers are clearly
rolling in the money!

D: Oh yea? I can't find decent candidates and I'm offering $220K plus a BMW!

E: I think $250K is kind of the baseline nowadays...

Come on, people listen to yourselves.

1: [https://www.glassdoor.com/Salaries/san-francisco-software-
en...](https://www.glassdoor.com/Salaries/san-francisco-software-engineer-
salary-SRCH_IL.0,13_IM759_KO14,31.htm)

2:
[http://www.payscale.com/research/US/Job=Software_Engineer/Sa...](http://www.payscale.com/research/US/Job=Software_Engineer/Salary/a5e48575/San-
Francisco-CA)

~~~
phamilton
I'm confused at the nay sayers. There are two ways I interpret it.

1\. People are telling the truth, but theres selection bias. Remember the
software world is very broad. A software engineer at Logitech doesn't make
nearly as much as one at Google.

2\. People are liars. It's really rare for an engineer at Google to make over
$200k.

I can sympathize with the first point (which I think is what you are saying),
but I have also seen the second point. People get angry when they realize they
are underpaid. The truth is that startups take advantage of people. Most
engineers don't realize this. If talented engineers in the valley all realized
what the opportunity cost of working for a startup is, then startups would
have to start paying closer to what BigCos pay. And that's a good thing. It
means those of us trapped by golden handcuffs at BigCos (mortgage, kids,
whatever) have alternatives.

~~~
ryandrake
It's probably both (although I don't think people are liars--how does one
benefit by lying to a bunch of people on HN?) Do a handful of engineers at a
handful of companies make big salaries? Of course. But they're outliers.
There's also surely selection bias at play. Do you think this site's audience
is more or less likely than a random sample of software professionals to know
someone who makes >$200K?

~~~
phamilton
"a handful of engineers at a handful of companies"

I think that phrasing is ambiguous. It makes it sound like even at Google only
the outliers make that much. Most engineers make a lot of money at Google
(relative to startups). It's not just the outliers within Google that make
good money.

The entire set of engineers at Google can be considered outliers, especially
given the sample set of all software engineers in the valley.

The point I try to make is that from a talent perspective, I don't think
Google engineers are significant outliers. At least, not to the degree they
are outliers from a compensation perspective. That's the gap I'd like to
close. There's plenty of Google level talent at startups not making anywhere
near what they would make at Google, and a big part of that is misinformation.

~~~
hackerweb
So the point is that in a super tight housing market, it doesn't take that
many outliers to have a big effect on housing prices. Obviously I'm aiming at
fairly high-end developers--like people with Ph.D.s or a decade of industry
experience. But there are tens of thousands of people like that in San
Francisco. And I've seen google, facebook, salesforce, vmware, and the like
offer unbelievable compensation to these people when I'm trying to hire them.

The pattern is such that I don't think people are lying. In some settings,
lying about offers could be a way to get leverage, but these people are not
trying to negotiate--they know a small company can't offer those kinds of
salaries, and do not ask for a counteroffer.

That said, note that I am not talking about salary, but "total compensation."
Obviously prospective employers have an incentive to paint as rosy a picture
as possible about that. So the base salaries might be even slightly under
$200K, but with hefty guaranteed bonuses for the first year or two plus stock
grants worth in the hundreds of thousands of dollars even if the stock stays
flat.

Another way to look at this is that the housing market is a function of three
things: income, interest rates, and the fraction of people's income they are
willing/able to spend on housing. So obviously interest rates have been super
low recently, and maybe people have increased the fraction of their pay they
spend on housing--but that still can't go above 100%. The main driver of the
San Francisco housing crisis is soaring income (and of course inequality)
combined with inadequate supply.

------
irixusr
Putting aside their dubious methodology (see other comments) I'm glad to see
Atlanta fared so well.

I lived in ATL for almost 19 years and it's one of the most livable places
I've ever been. Sad to be gone....

~~~
vinceguidry
In Atlanta, I actually feel like my dev salary puts me in the upper middle
class. NYC, LA, or SF, I'd be just getting by. Only other city that compares,
I think, is San Diego. Maybe Austin. Love this place.

~~~
mathgeek
It feels the same in most cities that aren't nationally known as tech hubs.
Especially if you work remotely from them, but that's a whole different
ballgame.

------
JeffreyKaine
Interesting that NYC isn't included but SF is.

------
golergka
Why in the lower chart there's only one salary figure for each profession,
without different values for different cities?

~~~
kelly-estately
Hi there,

We showed the median national salary for reference, but for the city
calculations, we used local median salaries.

Kelly from Estately

------
jenscow
What about houses with more than one income?

------
amgin3
If you live in Vancouver, every occupation is priced out except maybe CEO.

~~~
jholman
Vancouver (my city) is always rated as less affordable than every other
Canadian or American city (except maybe NYC). And yet somehow I am a homeowner
(mortgage-holding, not outright) in the city of Vancouver proper (not in a
cheap suburb), which I purchased when I was making the most I'd ever made in
my life, $50k/a (Vancouver junior dev salary around 2010).

What can we conclude from this? The only conclusion _I_ can reach is that
_most_ people who complain about not being able to afford real estate are
merely people with unrealistic expectations about what type of home they
"need". I just can't make heads or tails of it otherwise.

Note: sure, _some_ people really are locked out. If you're a 22yo single
parent with no marketable skills and having to work 60 hours a week to feed
your kids and etc-etc-etc, you're authorized by me to complain about your real
estate woes.

~~~
mistermann
I conclude that you haven't looked at prices in Vancouver proper lately.

~~~
bozo1979
I recall reading stats of 50% year on year recently. So GP, check your house
price and pat yourself on the back. Rest of us aren't so lucky.

~~~
jholman
Sorry, that's wrong. I've checked my home price, and I know what every unit in
this building sold for this year. And I have, to some degree, been keeping an
eye on alternatives in the Vancouver market.

Insufficiently lucky? No, those who "cannot afford real estate" are (in most
cases, as disclaimed above) insufficiently _disciplined_ and/or insufficiently
_realistic_.

~~~
mistermann
You're talking about condos, others are talking houses.

------
tamana
This is not economic research. This is social media marketing intern pulling
numbers out of their butt and drswing pictures.

------
dudul
Kind of funny to see that programmers can only afford 4% of houses in SF where
most programmer jobs are.

------
unixhero
Every one except the real professional occupations, like lawyer, doctor,
pilot, auditor, ibanker

------
bdrool
Restaurant servers at zero percent? I know some who own houses in the Bay
Area. Shit, I don't own one, but I know multiple restaurant workers who do.
Granted, these people don't exactly work at the Olive Garden (we're talking at
least one Michelin star), but it's not as simple as this article makes it out
to be, not by a long shot.

~~~
ptaipale
Restaurants with Michelin stars are so rare that their servers, even if they
do better than others, probably won't make a dent in the zero percent. Their
impact on the average earnings of restaurant servers is negligible.

Overall, this study is very US-specific, of course. In some industrial
countries the norm is to rent and only a minority own their homes anyway.

------
atemerev
I wonder when there will be headers like "homeownership is unsustainable".

------
746F7475
teachers in general earning $50k, either teachers have to super good in U.S.
or this doesn't include everything like high school, elementary schools,
kindergardens and whatever else there is.

~~~
withdavidli
starting pay in cities is usually around $40-45k. it goes up the longer you're
there. i had middle/high school teacher that's been doing it for 20yrs making
100k+.

~~~
yardie
If they are making that there is no way it's just for teaching. I assume they
have some administrative/leadership work involved. And probably a few degrees
as well.

When I was in school my freshly minted Calculus teacher was earning $60k with
her MS Math. My English teacher, $120k, was also the English curriculum
coordinator and had a PhD.Ed.

And experience counts. The green, math teacher could barely keep a bunch of
pubescent teenagers in their seats. Some of the exchanges were borderline
sexual harrassment. The English teacher knew how to command a classroom.

~~~
ap3
In San Diego teacher's salaries are set according to a schedule.

Fresh out of college you start at 40k and can increase to 90k after 15 years.
But you can increase by doing clubs or other activities + advanced degreees.

The downside is if you are a superstar teacher straight out of college you
still make 40k. Similarly if you are a crappy teacher after 15 years you still
make 90k

Thanks unions!

~~~
yardie
First year, superstar teachers (which I truly believe are unicorns) have
options to make more money. They can get advanced degrees or work in poor
performing schools with federal funding. The former takes time and the later
no one honestly wants to do. I don't think even superstar teachers can do it
year after year.

As far as pay. Like most jobs the first few years are low with a steep curve.
Then it tapers off to COL increases once you've put in many years. This can be
said of any job. Union and nonunion.

------
terramars
this is garbage, the geographic variation of salaries are significant (maybe
not for teachers or servers, but for others certainly). also, all the
astronauts live in florida or houston ;)

~~~
kelly-estately
Hi there,

We did take the local salaries into account in our calculations. They actually
do vary quite a bit for teachers! For example, the median teacher salary in
Chicago is $71k, but it's only $52k in St Louis.

Kelly from Estately

------
ryankupyn
This is interesting, but consider that income varies widely by location, and
is generally higher in areas with a higher cost of living. Both restaurant
servers and computer programmers make more in San Francisco than they would in
Scranton.

~~~
pawelk
I think they have accounted for that. FTA:

> After finding the _average annual salary_ for each profession _in each city_
> from Glassdoor, Estately then determined how much people in each profession
> could afford to spend on a home

