The problem is the quality of life expectations are quite high when you pay $3000 for 1 bedroom.
Relative to what you make, is that a lot, compared to what you'd make/pay in Kansas City?
Do you realize that the AQI is terrible for literally a third of the US right now?
If climate change is going to ruin CA, then it will also ruin a LOT of other places. Relatively speaking, the Bay Area will be nicer still, albeit much more expensive, than other places.
Idk about your job but my job would is willing to pay me a bonus to leave SF and will only cut my salary by 10%. Definitely seems worth it to me. Especially factoring in not needing to pay cali income or sales tax.
The bay areas has never been nice in the last 5 years. I can live in a more comfortable house where I don’t have to work 3ft from where I sleep in almost any other city.
$5k bonus and I have to stay at the company for a year. If I moved to Seattle (0% income tax), I would not have a pay cut and I would no longer need to pay California's 9.4%. Easy raise and bonus :).
Similar story for Orlando, but with a 10% cut. 10% pay cut and saving 9.3% in income and ~1.3% sales tax. Housing would be about $500/mo cheaper ($6k/yr) and way more comfortable to work from.
Taking this comment on good faith, I'm just asking for my own edification. I've lived in Seattle, downtown adjacent, for 10+ years, and really love it, even with COVID, outside of the few weeks where we've had bad smoke. Obviously if half the year is going to be like this, I'm leaving regardless of the salary ramifications, but if we are talking a week or so every couple years, it might be a different story. I moved to Seattle to escape other problematic issues where I used to live, and I suspect the same is true for lots of folks.
I can’t imagine why you moved to Seattle to escape “problematic issues” with where you lived before. Were you in Phoenix before...? Seattle isn’t exactly a place that lacks problems. I left in 2014 and as far as I can tell, it has only gotten worse with its issues.
Shhh! Not in front of the Coastals. Remember your debriefing when you left. The InterMountain West is whatever they think they don’t want. If you must, say you were in Montana or Idaho. Maybe Canada. Mention Breaking Bad, buses powered by burros, radioactive waste bins beside recycling bins...
Of course SLC has worse average AQI than a coastal city like SF. If you are inland and have a large population, you will have worse particulates. So let's look at coastal cities all of which have air quality as good or better than SF and have the bonus of warm water so you can swim at the beach:
Jacksonville, FL:
median HH income: 47K
median house price: 196K
Price to Income: 4.2
Charleston, SC:
median household income: 64K
median house price: 337K
median price to income: 5.3
Wilmington, NC:
median household income: 53K
median house price: 300K
price to income: 5.7
Do you see a pattern?
And none of these cities have streets filled with feces and homeless encampments, a 16% state income tax with high income surcharge, or refuse to prosecute property crime.
Where are you getting 16% state income tax from? In your median income example of 108k, the top rate for single filer is 9.3%, but that payers effective rate is only 6.6% (summed over all bracket). This is not much higher than Utah's flat 4.95%
Even a single filer making $500k/year will only hit a top rate of 11.3%, and effective rate of 9.4%. For surcharges to kick in requires > $1M/year, and only affects the amount over that.
Probably including the sales tax or something in the figure. Isn’t California one of the worst states in the country for tax burden?
I do find it weird that CA has some of the worst taxes for new residents. I can’t imagine a place that is more difficult to break into and then settle in. (High property values, outrageously high property taxes, high sales tax, high income tax, etc...) It’s setup to only let the rich get in and stay. Not a very inclusive place.
It still wouldn't make any sense including sales tax. The effect of sales tax on total tax burden scales even less linearly than the steeply progressive CA income tax rates! The more you earn, the smaller % of your income goes to things that are sales taxed.
The income tax scale in CA is steeply progressive, a 50k earner pays only 3.8%, less than almost all states that have flat income tax. For a median earner, CA is in the upper half but not exceptionally high:
https://wallethub.com/edu/states-with-highest-lowest-tax-bur...
Having been in very high income brackets myself, lived in both low and high col areas/states, and run this calculation often, I think taxes is largely a red herring. The difference made by tax is just peanuts compared to the impact of housing cost, which truly is very high in CA. For low income brackets, CA is frequently lower tax burden than elsewhere, but housing cost will destroy you. For very high income brackets you do start to see the difference in marginal tax rate, but your absolute income is so much higher that you aren't spending a significant % on sales tax, and those marginal differences aren't driving your decision making anymore.
Relative to what you make, is that a lot, compared to what you'd make/pay in Kansas City?
Do you realize that the AQI is terrible for literally a third of the US right now?
If climate change is going to ruin CA, then it will also ruin a LOT of other places. Relatively speaking, the Bay Area will be nicer still, albeit much more expensive, than other places.