Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login
Site Notices
9/19/2017 7:27:10 PM
Arrow Left Previous Page
Page / 2
Posted: 3/16/2006 3:36:05 PM EDT
Here's the scenario:

$150,000/yr salary, but you must live and work anywhere in City and County of San Francisco.
$35,000/yr salray, but you must live and work anywhere in Fulton County Ohio.

Those are your options (and neither I nor anyone I know are facing them personally). What would you do? Google each location for pros/cons as needed.
Link Posted: 3/16/2006 3:38:40 PM EDT
anywhere but SanFran, for any amount of income.
Link Posted: 3/16/2006 3:38:41 PM EDT
I certainly wouldn't consider 150k 'rich' in SF.
Link Posted: 3/16/2006 3:40:21 PM EDT

Originally Posted By Observer:
I certainly wouldn't consider 150k 'rich' in SF.



You can rent a nice flat there on that salary, and still have a respectable amount left over.
Link Posted: 3/16/2006 3:41:45 PM EDT
I'd live in a small but nice apartment in SF and live the city life. A decent but moderately priced car ($20,000-$30,000) and the rest going towards a shack or trailer home in the Nevada or Arizona desert, complete with a high quality gun safe.
Link Posted: 3/16/2006 3:42:49 PM EDT
A little more $ and in the country would be real nice.
Link Posted: 3/16/2006 3:43:57 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 3/16/2006 3:47:00 PM EDT by VTHOKIESHOOTER]
Hell I make $35,000 in SW Virginia and I am just fine and dandy.
Link Posted: 3/16/2006 3:44:09 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 3/16/2006 3:45:02 PM EDT by Aimless]
Link Posted: 3/16/2006 3:45:34 PM EDT

Originally Posted By Aimless:
$ 150k ain't rich in SF.


sf median income $ 55221
Fulton County Oh $ 36180



Cut me some slack, it's a figure of speech.
Link Posted: 3/16/2006 3:46:07 PM EDT
that's not a choice, s/f is not an option
Link Posted: 3/16/2006 3:46:46 PM EDT
City life in San Fran. Its a beautiful area, minus the politics.
Link Posted: 3/16/2006 3:47:39 PM EDT
cities are for ccity people. i like the country. it's just different.
Link Posted: 3/16/2006 3:47:46 PM EDT
Also remember that handguns are illegal now in SF.
Link Posted: 3/16/2006 3:49:21 PM EDT

Originally Posted By MuRDoC:
that's not a choice, s/f is not an option



So, can I put you down for Fulton County?
Link Posted: 3/16/2006 3:54:11 PM EDT
How about struggling in the burbs of B'ham?
Link Posted: 3/16/2006 3:55:07 PM EDT

Originally Posted By DOA:
City life in San Fran. Its a beautiful area, minus the politics.



It is that, very nice city.
Link Posted: 3/16/2006 3:56:37 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 3/16/2006 3:58:19 PM EDT by TrijiCog]
I lived in SF for a while,and there is nothing that would make me move back there.Politics don't bother me as much as all the damn traffic.Plus all that damn fog is depressing..But the food is great in and around the city.

ETA:150K a year won't get you much in the city,you would most likely have to live in or around Hunters Point
Link Posted: 3/16/2006 3:57:44 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 3/16/2006 4:11:59 PM EDT by TacticalPenguin]
Fuck the city, country all the way


Edit to say especially if I could go true small county country, like Hazzard in Kentucky
Link Posted: 3/16/2006 3:58:11 PM EDT

Originally Posted By Bama-Shooter:
It is that, very nice city.



"The problem with Scotland is that its full of Scots!"
Link Posted: 3/16/2006 4:03:18 PM EDT
Of your two choices: Ohio.

Why?
1)It's not Commiefornia
2)CCW, Class 3
3)Country living seems nice(although I've lived in urban areas all my life)
4)It's not Commiefornia.
Link Posted: 3/16/2006 4:03:34 PM EDT

Originally Posted By TrijiCog:
I lived in SF for a while,and there is nothing that would make me move back there.Politics don't bother me as much as all the damn traffic.Plus all that damn fog is depressing..But the food is great in and around the city.

ETA:150K a year won't get you much in the city,you would most likely have to live in or around Hunters Point



You'll net a good $8000 a month (~33% effective state/local tax rate). Figure $3000/mo for an apartment/flat rental (pretty reasonable figure) and that leaves you with 5K for bills and fun. 5K is a lot of wiggle room - both in effective tax rate, and housing costs.
Link Posted: 3/16/2006 4:04:12 PM EDT
Up me to $200k and I'll take San Fran.

I wouldn't mind living in the country, but I wouldn't live in Ohio at any price.

When I started interviewing with Bank One many years ago, I told them from the outset that if the position involved moving to Columbus then we could stop talking right now.

Link Posted: 3/16/2006 4:04:17 PM EDT
San Francisco

> dont need a car [use BART, public transportation]

plus SF is my hometown

Link Posted: 3/16/2006 4:05:38 PM EDT

Originally Posted By NoVaGator:
Up me to $200k and I'll take San Fran.

I wouldn't mind living in the country, but I wouldn't live in Ohio at any price.

When I started interviewing with Bank One many years ago, I told them from the outset that if the position involved moving to Columbus then we could stop talking right now.






I've hear people say that about California, but never about Ohio. At any price? I'd love to know why, this is interesting.
Link Posted: 3/16/2006 4:08:42 PM EDT

Originally Posted By SubnetMask:

Originally Posted By NoVaGator:
Up me to $200k and I'll take San Fran.

I wouldn't mind living in the country, but I wouldn't live in Ohio at any price.

When I started interviewing with Bank One many years ago, I told them from the outset that if the position involved moving to Columbus then we could stop talking right now.






I've hear people say that about California, but never about Ohio. At any price? I'd love to know why, this is interesting.



It's not just Ohio. Add in IN, IL, MI, PA. I don't like the midwest. It's depressing. But there are plenty of other states I wouldn't move to either.



Link Posted: 3/16/2006 4:09:00 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 3/16/2006 4:10:32 PM EDT by AcidGambit]
SF is fooking expensive ! My cousin lives there and has like, three roommates... I think he chuggs cock though and he is happy there.
Link Posted: 3/16/2006 4:09:16 PM EDT
I'll take the country.
Link Posted: 3/16/2006 4:15:35 PM EDT
I have that exact choice to make in about a year, well over $100k in Los Angeles area, or 30-40k in rural Idaho. I have no idea what to do.
Link Posted: 3/16/2006 4:16:26 PM EDT
The only way I'd live in San Fran is if by some miracle all the libs either died or other wise left. Even then it would cost a pretty penny to pay me until the laws and such were all straightened out. It IS pretty, but then again so are a lot of places that aren't Marxist strongholds. As it is now, $150K isn't nearly enough. Maybe double that. I'm happier here on a little more than half that.

If I could take the $35K and choose my own place (not necessarily Ohio), that would be even better. There are lots of places in the USA where that would be a very comfortable income level, and I wouldn't have to deal with all the freaks and scumbags of SF. And the hippies. Fuck that.

Link Posted: 3/16/2006 4:17:11 PM EDT

Originally Posted By deej86:
Of your two choices: Ohio.

Why?
1)It's not Commiefornia
2)CCW, Class 3
3)Country living seems nice(although I've lived in urban areas all my life)
4)It's not Commiefornia.



Figure you'll have $5,000 left over each month to fuck around if you pick SF. Add in a car + insurance + gas = $1,000. Now we're at $4,000. Figure $500 for food and entertainment. $3,500. I'm sure you could live comfortably and buy a shithole trailer home in Nevada or Arizona in the middle of the desert to use as your personal gun storage and shooting range with the money that's left over, all while enjoying life in what is a fine city (Aside from the gun laws and high cost of living). Of course I imagine most here are country folk. I'm a city person myself.
Link Posted: 3/16/2006 4:27:47 PM EDT
What do you do?

If it's for a career then go with the choice that helps you out the best. Why sacrifice your future for the present.

The country life is over rated, the city life is over rated. They both have their good and bad points. I dont know how old you are, but if you're young go with San Francisco. Save money, live modestly, build your career if thats why you are going. You can always move back to nowhere Ohio and get a good job with all the knowledge you gained. But its much harder to start out your career or even work in nowhere Ohio and then try to move somewhere else. It really limits your choices later in life.

Or even go to SF for a few years, gain some experience, build your resume, then you can find an even better job in nowhere Ohio.
Link Posted: 3/16/2006 4:33:14 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 3/16/2006 4:35:11 PM EDT by Triumph955i]
Nevermind. Read the statement wrong. sorry.
Link Posted: 3/16/2006 4:53:22 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 3/16/2006 4:54:46 PM EDT by nefariousnick]
I've been to SF. It's a shit hole. Beggers all over the place. Gang bangers. I was warned at the rental car place not to get out of the car in the Mission distric. The people who worked at the office I was at said as soon as its time to go, they run to the Bart. Hell, every person in that building I met lived outside of the city! Because at night SF is taken over by the Vampires. I saw some of those freaks lurking in the dark corners. Pasty white faces, black lipstick, dark mascara and all black clothes. And the chicks were worse. And the usual Kali crap of no AW's, CCW or class III. And how about some place to shoot. Not some regulated range, but a blaster range that you can blow up stuff.

But if your young and want money, SF would be your place. But get in and get out. Like all those people in the big buildings.
Link Posted: 3/16/2006 5:04:55 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 3/16/2006 5:07:58 PM EDT by swingset]

Originally Posted By SubnetMask:
Here's the scenario:

$150,000/yr salary, but you must live and work anywhere in City and County of San Francisco.
$35,000/yr salray, but you must live and work anywhere in Fulton County Ohio.

Those are your options (and neither I nor anyone I know are facing them personally). What would you do? Google each location for pros/cons as needed.



Considering the cost of housing and living expenses, they are honestly dead even. You could own a modular on 10 acres in Fulton Co., shoot on your back porch, etc. San Fran is a nice climate, neat sites, lots to do.

So, you have to look at the ancillary benefits.

Gun ownage? Ohio.

Freedom? Ohio.

Access to lots of gay men? San Fran.

Hmmmm.....tough call.
Link Posted: 3/16/2006 11:17:11 PM EDT
you guys are fucking morons.



at $35k per year you'd NEVER be able to retire.


One could live in Daly City (still in the County of SF) and be exempt from the handgun ban.

Have enough money to go elsewhere for vacation. Often.
Link Posted: 3/16/2006 11:19:47 PM EDT


hell no to SFO
Link Posted: 3/17/2006 4:51:08 AM EDT
So far, I'm actually a bit suprised by the numbers. I'm not suprised that the majority voted the way they did, but I'm shocked that 19 people would choose San Francisco.

I'm not shocked because it's a bad choice, I'm shocked that 19 people on ar15.com chose San Francisco, and 8 of them aren't sure. I never would've figured that.

Link Posted: 3/17/2006 5:08:51 AM EDT

Originally Posted By BigBang:
I have that exact choice to make in about a year, well over $100k in Los Angeles area, or 30-40k in rural Idaho. I have no idea what to do.



Have you ever lived in the country? If you have then you can make a good desicion. If you have not, then move there, at least for a couple years to get your feet wet. Idaho is a great place to live (even though I have never lived there). I grew up in Rual WY and I am moving back in a couple of weeks. SD has TOO much of nothing but provate property. Drives me nuts. All the features of living in the country without the country.
Link Posted: 3/17/2006 5:11:56 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 3/17/2006 5:13:02 AM EDT by gus]

Originally Posted By Mall-Ninja:
you guys are fucking morons.



at $35k per year you'd NEVER be able to retire.


One could live in Daly City (still in the County of SF) and be exempt from the handgun ban.

Have enough money to go elsewhere for vacation. Often.



On the contrary, you could have your land/home paid off long before retirement. Also, handguns aren't the only reason to despise SF and Kali in general. Maybe if I could commute in from Nevada daily, but that aint' happening.

I live in the country in a "free" state (for now anyway) and work in Baltimore, which is a lot like San Fran in a lot of ways. Every time I go home from work it's like going on vacation.

I'd rather retire at 70 having enjoyed my life than retire at 58, rich, after a life of stress and unhappyness.
Link Posted: 3/17/2006 5:13:01 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 3/17/2006 5:15:20 AM EDT by enigma2y0u]

Originally Posted By Mall-Ninja:
you guys are fucking morons.



at $35k per year you'd NEVER be able to retire.


One could live in Daly City (still in the County of SF) and be exempt from the handgun ban.

Have enough money to go elsewhere for vacation. Often.



I would say your not very bright. You have no idea how far 35K would get you in the country.

ETA: 35k isn't exactly a good paying job in the country. You can get paid as much as your willing to work, Hard work though with some jobs. I make 38k right now and we just built a house, try building a 2700 sq foot house on a 1/2 acre in SF for 120k.
Link Posted: 3/17/2006 5:13:33 AM EDT
Ha! I'm already there!
Link Posted: 3/17/2006 5:16:46 AM EDT
I'd rather be poor in the country.


But I use the term poor loosely because poor to me is when you don't have money for rent and food and can't buy your kid a pair of shoes when they need it, etc.

Link Posted: 3/17/2006 5:17:23 AM EDT
In the land of opportunity, there are more than two options.
Link Posted: 3/17/2006 5:20:31 AM EDT
Lived in OH for 4 or 5 years and hated it. The only thing I liked about it is the gun laws and shows.
Try somewhere else like TX or FL.
Link Posted: 3/17/2006 5:21:01 AM EDT

Originally Posted By Ginger:
I'd rather be poor in the country.


But I use the term poor loosely because poor to me is when you don't have money for rent and food and can't buy your kid a pair of shoes when they need it, etc.



Well, the title was a catchy figure of speech. You got the idea, though.
Link Posted: 3/17/2006 5:21:35 AM EDT

Originally Posted By gus:

Originally Posted By Mall-Ninja:
you guys are fucking morons.



at $35k per year you'd NEVER be able to retire.


One could live in Daly City (still in the County of SF) and be exempt from the handgun ban.

Have enough money to go elsewhere for vacation. Often.



On the contrary, you could have your land/home paid off long before retirement. Also, handguns aren't the only reason to despise SF and Kali in general. Maybe if I could commute in from Nevada daily, but that aint' happening.

I live in the country in a "free" state (for now anyway) and work in Baltimore, which is a lot like San Fran in a lot of ways. Every time I go home from work it's like going on vacation.

I'd rather retire at 70 having enjoyed my life than retire at 58, rich, after a life of stress and unhappyness.



I disagree with that.

While they might be similar on the downside, Baltimore has no upside.
Link Posted: 3/17/2006 5:21:57 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 3/17/2006 5:33:48 AM EDT by Outsider_10fp]
this is funny!
I put myself on a 35K salary, I just bought a house in a small city in the "country". House payment is 360.00 a month 3 bedroom, 15 minute ride to private land and can shoot ANYThinG.
3 miles off I-95 in NC, I also put aside 200 bux amonth for "retirement" (including stocks and other goodies.

35K will go along way if you dont buy dumb shit all the time .

HEll NO to SF
and I am with NoVaGator, the midwest is unapealing and PA is too close to the NE
Link Posted: 3/17/2006 5:22:03 AM EDT
I choose the country. But can I choose another county besides Fulton? Fulton is a one deer county and it's in the northern part of the state were you get a lot of snow. How about Brown or Adams?
Link Posted: 3/17/2006 5:22:08 AM EDT

Originally Posted By Q3131A:
In the land of opportunity, there are more than two options.



But in the land of ARFCOM, 5 choice polls don't work and a false dichotomy is preferred.
Link Posted: 3/17/2006 5:22:17 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 3/17/2006 5:22:30 AM EDT by gus]

Originally Posted By NoVaGator:

Originally Posted By gus:

Originally Posted By Mall-Ninja:
you guys are fucking morons.



at $35k per year you'd NEVER be able to retire.


One could live in Daly City (still in the County of SF) and be exempt from the handgun ban.

Have enough money to go elsewhere for vacation. Often.



On the contrary, you could have your land/home paid off long before retirement. Also, handguns aren't the only reason to despise SF and Kali in general. Maybe if I could commute in from Nevada daily, but that aint' happening.

I live in the country in a "free" state (for now anyway) and work in Baltimore, which is a lot like San Fran in a lot of ways. Every time I go home from work it's like going on vacation.

I'd rather retire at 70 having enjoyed my life than retire at 58, rich, after a life of stress and unhappyness.



I disagree with that.

While they might be similar on the downside, Baltimore has no upside.



Sure it does, there's a state border within 20 miles.
Link Posted: 3/17/2006 5:24:10 AM EDT

Originally Posted By enigma2y0u:

Originally Posted By BigBang:
I have that exact choice to make in about a year, well over $100k in Los Angeles area, or 30-40k in rural Idaho. I have no idea what to do.



Have you ever lived in the country? If you have then you can make a good desicion. If you have not, then move there, at least for a couple years to get your feet wet. Idaho is a great place to live (even though I have never lived there). I grew up in Rual WY and I am moving back in a couple of weeks. SD has TOO much of nothing but provate property. Drives me nuts. All the features of living in the country without the country.



If you grew up in rural WY (isn't all of it rural?) your concept of city vs. country is probably a little out of whack. You're beyond "out in the country" in rural WY.
Arrow Left Previous Page
Page / 2
Top Top