people choose to live in bay area not because its housing situation, but despite of it.
mainly because cutting edge R&D type technology has been developed in the area and alternatives to SV have not developed yet. its not even pay - I would say bay area pay is bad, because of cost of living & taxation.
But opportunities for growth are unmatched in bay area
The point is you can't adequately judge whether a job counts as "wageslave" just from the salary. A $300K job where houses cost $2M is like a $30K job where houses cost $200K.
This is incorrect. If my income and expenses both increase by 10x, my savings increase by 10x. After just a few years of saving, I have the option of moving somewhere cheaper and living like a king.
It's not like your savings and investments are adjusted for the cost of living when you move.
In the extreme case, you can earn as much as possible and accumulate enough to live on indefinitely in a cheap country. This is obviously better than just earning a low salary in the cheap country for the same amount of time.
if your income 10x and you are on the wage - then that means you are either will have to work 10x more hours - or work 10x more intensively/efficiently, which leads to its own burnout and issues.
main point being is that if your income doubles, your savings rate will double, but your work related stress will double, and arguably your health (mental and physical) will deteriorate at 2x faster rate
mainly because cutting edge R&D type technology has been developed in the area and alternatives to SV have not developed yet. its not even pay - I would say bay area pay is bad, because of cost of living & taxation.
But opportunities for growth are unmatched in bay area