Aspasia Posted December 17, 2015 Share Posted December 17, 2015 ...which one would you choose? My husband is still in process with the NYC bank opportunity I mentioned a few months ago. But now a head hunter has contacted him about a job at a bank in San Francisco. This is a hard decision for us! I mean, he doesn't have an actual offer or salary figure from either bank (though NYC bank is flying him up for a 7th and final interview right after Christmas and the head hunter for SF seems sure he could get a very good amount in SF, and says NYC won't be able to match it—who knows? He sort of has an ulterior motive.) The cost of living seems comparable. Pros of SF: -weather is always perfect -access to outdoor activities -closer to our families, in Utah -closer to Hawaii -we can get more living space for the same price Pros of NYC: -It's NYC! It's the capital of the world! -more diversity -access to more museums and theater opportunities -the adventure of city living (SF just isn't the same) -closer to Europe -I've always wanted to live there What do you guys think? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ellie Posted December 17, 2015 Share Posted December 17, 2015 That *is* a hard decision! But I'd take SF. Because California. 7 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Catwoman Posted December 17, 2015 Share Posted December 17, 2015 Depending on how much money your dh will be making, it is somewhat doubtful that you will be living right in the middle of NYC. You are more likely to live in a suburb and your dh will commute in and out of the city for work every day -- which can add up to a long and stressful day for him. I have never lived in SF, but as someone who has lived in NYC, I have to say that it may not be as glamorous as you anticipate unless your dh will be paid a very, very high salary. 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted December 17, 2015 Share Posted December 17, 2015 If it were me, probably I would pick NYC, because I like being on the east coast, my sister lives there, and personally, I like deciduous seasons. I want snow now and then; I like to wear boots and sweaters. But if I had family in Utah, that would probably sway me to SF. Plus, yeah - HI is closer. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted December 17, 2015 Share Posted December 17, 2015 NYC. Because California :laugh: I love LOVE NYC, though. I feel no feelings for SF, despite spending way more time there. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SparklyUnicorn Posted December 17, 2015 Share Posted December 17, 2015 Neither, but if forced to choose, probably NYC. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pawz4me Posted December 17, 2015 Share Posted December 17, 2015 I have to say that I find it very weird that someone with your user name is debating between two big cities. :lol: 14 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
3 ladybugs Posted December 17, 2015 Share Posted December 17, 2015 NYC. No questions asked. SF is nice, but not NYC. I had a job for a while that I was home for 3 weeks, and in SF for about 3 weeks. SF was nice, but I got the worlds worse cab driver that told me that where I was staying was a former landfill and if there was an earthquake, it would go into the sea. 😳😳 Snow storms are not as scary. Not to mention it is NY! If you can't find it there, you can't find it anywhere! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EmilyGF Posted December 17, 2015 Share Posted December 17, 2015 If I were a software engineer, SF. If I were in finance, NYC. Which one has more advancement opportunities for DH? I don't think either one would be a fail if the paycheck suffices. Emily 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MEmama Posted December 17, 2015 Share Posted December 17, 2015 I grew up near SF and went to school there. So...NYC, hands down! :) I love the east coast and wouldn't back to CA for anything. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pink and Green Mom Posted December 17, 2015 Share Posted December 17, 2015 No advice but I'm glad you posted - I was wondering what you had decided to do based on your lasts posts about NYC. :lol: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Janie Grace Posted December 17, 2015 Share Posted December 17, 2015 NYC. The water shortage stresses me out. Plus I like seasons. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
medawyn Posted December 17, 2015 Share Posted December 17, 2015 I've lived in both. If you'll be in the city proper, I'd vote NYC hands down. I still miss New York! But if you'll be in the 'burbs, San Francisco. We're leaving the Bay Area at the end of the month, and we're really going to miss it. But as far as cities go? NYC will always have my heart. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aspasia Posted December 17, 2015 Author Share Posted December 17, 2015 No advice but I'm glad you posted - I was wondering what you had decided to do based on your lasts posts about NYC. :lol: Yeah, that process has taken forever! His former boss contacted him about it months before it was actually posted, and thus jump started my anxiety. :) And then they finally posted it last month, so...he's been interviewing and all that jazz. He was supposed to fly up this Monday for the final interview, but he decided to postpone in order to buy some time to explore the San Francisco thing, which is already posted and actively seeking candidates. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aspasia Posted December 17, 2015 Author Share Posted December 17, 2015 I've lived in both. If you'll be in the city proper, I'd vote NYC hands down. I still miss New York! But if you'll be in the 'burbs, San Francisco. We're leaving the Bay Area at the end of the month, and we're really going to miss it. But as far as cities go? NYC will always have my heart. If we do NYC, we'd do either Brooklyn (Park Slope) or the UWS or UES. We don't want any long commutes. We already have that here (in DC) and it has ruined our lives. Even if we stay here, we're going to move closer to DC, but dh is kind of looking forward to getting out of government work. He used to be excited about it, but he's just kind of tired of the constant crises, all-night emailing, urgent papers for high-level officials, etc. He doesn't get home until after 8:00 every night. And this is just our norm. We're used to it. All his friends who have left for the private sector rave about their new lives: they're eating dinner with their families every night, working from home a couple days a week, coaching their kids' soccer teams, etc. Oh, and making tons more money. 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aspasia Posted December 17, 2015 Author Share Posted December 17, 2015 I have to say that I find it very weird that someone with your user name is debating between two big cities. :lol: Wishful thinking! 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tanaqui Posted December 17, 2015 Share Posted December 17, 2015 I'd stay in NYC, because I don't really want to have to move :) But if my whole family up and moved to the West Coast, and I had the opportunity to move closer to them with the same cost of living and income and all, I probably would do that. I like being near family. So, with your family being in Utah, that is a definite push in that direction as far as I'm concerned. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted December 17, 2015 Share Posted December 17, 2015 (edited) San Francisco is one of the few place that makes family living in NYC look affordable. You can find good options closer, at w better price, than SF and the surrounding area. The commutes to find affordable housing in SF can be two or three hours, and most of my Jersey and NY friends can get into and out of the city in under 90 minutes, especially with public transportation. Also, California absolutely stinks. Even with commutes or subway I'd still recommend NYC first. Edited December 17, 2015 by Arctic Mama Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Amira Posted December 17, 2015 Share Posted December 17, 2015 I'd pick New York over San Francisco if I could live anywhere in either city, but in reality, it would come down to where we could live in each city. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Farrar Posted December 17, 2015 Share Posted December 17, 2015 That *is* a hard decision! But I'd take SF. Because California. That's funny. I'd say New York. Because... California. ;) 6 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aspasia Posted December 17, 2015 Author Share Posted December 17, 2015 San Francisco is one of the few place that makes family living in NYC look affordable. You can find good options closer, at w better price, than SF and the surrounding area. Also, California absolutely stinks. Even with commutes or subway I'd still recommend NYC first. Everyone keeps saying this, but the same rent that gets us a tiny little 3-bedroom in Park Slope (and an even tinier 3-bedroom in the UWS or UES) can get us a nice updated house with a yard in Berkeley or Walnut Creek. Then we compared buying. $1 million can get a very nice 3- or 4-bedroom, updated home with a yard within a 40-minute commute of San Francisco. In Park Slope, you can't buy ANYTHING for less than $2.5 million, and nothing in good shape for less than $3 million. Everyone says SF is more expensive, but I'm just not seeing it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
8circles Posted December 17, 2015 Share Posted December 17, 2015 NYC is very stressfull for me, so I'd pick SF. Of course, it's hard to say which would have a better living situation without more information, so that could make a huge difference. But all else being equal, I'd pick SF, hands down. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
freesia Posted December 17, 2015 Share Posted December 17, 2015 I think SF is lovely. I love visting. I live near NYC. I am from, and love DC. I would chose SF over NYC anyday. Living in NY, especially homeschooling, drives me nuts. No one is happy here. Everyone is grumpy. NYC is fun to visit, but if I had to choose a city that wasn't DC, SF would be in the top 5. 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Farrar Posted December 17, 2015 Share Posted December 17, 2015 If you stay in DC, move into the city. It's better here than in the 'burbs by far. :D 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Annie G Posted December 17, 2015 Share Posted December 17, 2015 I would pick NYC but I don;t have young children. I don't think I'd enjoy getting four young kids around NYC on subways, cabs, Uber, or whatever. And they're still young enough that winter wear is tedious. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Reefgazer Posted December 17, 2015 Share Posted December 17, 2015 NYC. I lived there for years before moving to Virginia and it is an exciting city at any age! No earthquakes, either. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
catz Posted December 17, 2015 Share Posted December 17, 2015 Darn, that is hard. But SF is like one of my very favorite cities and I love the weather there (mild mild mild!) so I would totally have to go with that. Especially if I could live IN SF. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gingersmom Posted December 17, 2015 Share Posted December 17, 2015 I thought you were moving to Park Slope, Brooklyn? Or do I have you confused with someone else? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rebbyribs Posted December 17, 2015 Share Posted December 17, 2015 I vote for SF, since that's where my husband is working and we're pretty happy here. :-) Living in (some parts of) the East Bay isn't that expensive -- what's really pricey is being in the city or closer to the tech jobs in the South Bay / Peninsula. I'd recommend looking at El Cerrito and the adjoining areas, where you can buy a 3 BR house in walking distance of BART for well less than $1 million. Or try Alameda, if a commute by ferry sounds good. I saw that you had a thread earlier about putting your kids in public school because it worked well for your family for you to have a break from your big kids. Areas with better public schools are going to be more expensive, of course. The charter school options in CA might work well for you if you want to try homeschooling again with 1 day per week off. Some offer enrichment classes, while others give you stipend money that can be used toward classes with outside vendors. The one we're with doesn't offer quite enough to cover full-day weekly classes for a whole year, but it comes close. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Renthead Mommy Posted December 17, 2015 Share Posted December 17, 2015 I grew up in NJ, 20 miles outside the city. For three years we lived in Long Island while husband did a residency at LIJ. We currently live 45 miles outside SF, but locals call it "just outside SF". I would pick NYC in a heartbeat. We were so disappointed in SF. It is FILTHY! There is so much more to do in and around NYC than in SF. So muchy more history and culture to pick from in NY. Communting into and out of NYC is so much easier and so much better set up than SF. Plus you have the whole east coast of things to do. Here, everything is an hour plus away. Well that is what it is supposed to be. There is always that extra hour of traffic to add to anywhere you want to go. I will take the NYC bridge and tunnel traffic any day over the SF area traffic. 5 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tanaqui Posted December 17, 2015 Share Posted December 17, 2015 No earthquakes, either. Very few earthquakes, anyway, and they're not strong. We had one a few years ago. After the ground rumbled for quite a while I thought "Wow, that train's taking a long time to pass!" and then had the sudden, disconcerting realization that a. we were half a mile from the nearest train station and b. it's above ground. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Liz CA Posted December 17, 2015 Share Posted December 17, 2015 (edited) San Francisco. Unless you are tightly wound and like it that way, you will find the West Coast more relaxing...more bucolic. Honestly, are you an East Coast Family and cannot imagine living "out" West? Would you like to trade in humid summers and brutal winters for a temperate climate? Do you like a rugged coastline? Could you live without seeing as many trees turn fall colors? There are just so many factors not to mention the work environment for your dh. Edited December 17, 2015 by Liz CA 7 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SeaConquest Posted December 17, 2015 Share Posted December 17, 2015 That's hard. In banking, NYC is definitely going to be the epicenter, but the QOL is going to be better in SF. Personally, I would take QOL. I much prefer So Cal to SF, but, having read your previous post about relocating from DC, I think you will be happier on the west coast. Good luck with the decision! 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
idnib Posted December 17, 2015 Share Posted December 17, 2015 I live just outside SF. Would his job depend at all on the financial markets? People here who need to be on top of the markets are often at work by 4:30-5:00 am, although they're done early too, which can be handy. I'm just trying to come up with any considerations not mentioned yet. 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
medawyn Posted December 17, 2015 Share Posted December 17, 2015 Everyone keeps saying this, but the same rent that gets us a tiny little 3-bedroom in Park Slope (and an even tinier 3-bedroom in the UWS or UES) can get us a nice updated house with a yard in Berkeley or Walnut Creek. Then we compared buying. $1 million can get a very nice 3- or 4-bedroom, updated home with a yard within a 40-minute commute of San Francisco. In Park Slope, you can't buy ANYTHING for less than $2.5 million, and nothing in good shape for less than $3 million. Everyone says SF is more expensive, but I'm just not seeing it. It's NEVER a 40 min commute to the city (says someone who has lived in both Berkely and Walnut Creek), unless your DH will work within walking distance of BART. Not that NYC traffic is a whole lot better, but you do have more transit options into and within the city. The East Bay really is fantastic, esp if you plan to hike and be out and about. I'm sick about leaving behind weather that lets us be outside basically 360 days a year. And, again, if you are going to end up in a bedroom community, I would definitely lean towards SF. However, getting into and around SF is a real pain if you live out. It's much more of a driving city than NYC, so traffic and parking are always an issue. Living in Park Slope or the UE/WS is absolutely not comparable to Berkely or WC. You are comparing apples to oranges in terms of locations. Look at houses outside the five boroughs for more comparable lifestyles. Again, if you are able to afford living in NYC and will take advantage of the urban living, than I would say 100% go with NY. However, if you would rather look at something more suburban and deal with the commute, than San Francisco is probably your better option. 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kewb Posted December 17, 2015 Share Posted December 17, 2015 I love both cities but I am a NYC gal. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aspasia Posted December 17, 2015 Author Share Posted December 17, 2015 (edited) I thought you were moving to Park Slope, Brooklyn? Or do I have you confused with someone else? That was me. We're just fielding different opportunities and trying to decide which one we would prefer. :) I vote for SF, since that's where my husband is working and we're pretty happy here. :-) Living in (some parts of) the East Bay isn't that expensive -- what's really pricey is being in the city or closer to the tech jobs in the South Bay / Peninsula. I'd recommend looking at El Cerrito and the adjoining areas, where you can buy a 3 BR house in walking distance of BART for well less than $1 million. Or try Alameda, if a commute by ferry sounds good. I saw that you had a thread earlier about putting your kids in public school because it worked well for your family for you to have a break from your big kids. Areas with better public schools are going to be more expensive, of course. The charter school options in CA might work well for you if you want to try homeschooling again with 1 day per week off. Some offer enrichment classes, while others give you stipend money that can be used toward classes with outside vendors. The one we're with doesn't offer quite enough to cover full-day weekly classes for a whole year, but it comes close. We're probably going to be homeschooling again. Long story, but I'm not getting the break I thought I would get, and we all really miss homeschooling! So we're going to restructure some things so that I get some more breaks in other areas. San Francisco. Unless you are tightly wound and like it that way, you will find the West Coast more relaxing...more bucolic. Honestly, are you an East Coast Family and cannot imagine living "out" West? Would you like to trade in humid summers and brutal winters for a temperate climate? Do you like a rugged coastline? Could you live without seeing as many trees turn fall colors? There are just so many factors not to mention the work environment for your dh. Well, I guess we have sort of built our family on the East Coast (we've been here for six years), but dh and I are from Salt Lake City. So we're definitely westerners. I would definitely prefer a more temperate climate (with a yearly, week-long winter trip to a rented cabin in the mountains). The weather and proximity to the coast is the big draw for me. I mean, we're obviously close here, too, but not like in SF. I live just outside SF. Would his job depend at all on the financial markets? People here who need to be on top of the markets are often at work by 4:30-5:00 am, although they're done early too, which can be handy. I'm just trying to come up with any considerations not mentioned yet. No, he would be in compliance. Edited December 17, 2015 by Bucolic 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aspasia Posted December 17, 2015 Author Share Posted December 17, 2015 (edited) Living in Park Slope or the UE/WS is absolutely not comparable to Berkely or WC. You are comparing apples to oranges in terms of locations. Look at houses outside the five boroughs for more comparable lifestyles. I know the lifestyles are totally different, but I'm thinking in terms of commute times. The commute from Park Slope to Midtown looks to be about 40 minutes. Same with Berkeley to the Financial District in SF (which is my first choice city in the Bay Area--my dad lived there for a few years, so I spent a lot of time there and I love it.) So for the same commute time, our money seems to go a lot farther in the Bay Area. Edited December 17, 2015 by Bucolic Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
J-rap Posted December 17, 2015 Share Posted December 17, 2015 I grew up South of SF, but I'd pick NYC. I really love NYC; to me, it's so much easier to navigate than SF. And it feels more condensed, with little neighborhoods, etc., whereas SF feels more sprawling. Plus I think the cost of living would be less in NYC. I wouldn't need to hesitate for even one second: NYC. 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ktgrok Posted December 17, 2015 Share Posted December 17, 2015 SF. First, it's closer to family, and your kids would get to grow up seeing their relatives more. That means a lot. Second, um, weather. And third and fourth, lol. Plus it seems prettier, from the photos my girlfriend posted when she lived there. NY just seems so industrial. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BigMamaBird Posted December 17, 2015 Share Posted December 17, 2015 Both of them would drive me insane!!! But if I HAD to choose, I'd pick NYC. To be mind numbingly stereotypical, one has Broadway and tons of museums, the other has earthquakes and hippies. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Donna Posted December 17, 2015 Share Posted December 17, 2015 I have been in both but know NYC better since I live on the East Coast. So, I would pick NYC. There is so much to do and I know more people there. I do like the weather, lack on winter, in San Fran and for you, it is closer to family. Not so sure about the difference in cost of living. You could always live slightly outside actual NYC (or SF?) and commute in easily. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
madteaparty Posted December 17, 2015 Share Posted December 17, 2015 That's funny. I'd say New York. Because... California. ;)I need to be rich enough to never ever have to ride the subway in NYC (or DC, for that matter) before moving there again, but I also cannot abide the tech nonsense and attendant existential crisis now playing out in those parts of California. Plus, earthquakes. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
creekland Posted December 17, 2015 Share Posted December 17, 2015 Wow, for me, this decision could be grounds for divorce. Chances are I'd tell him to take the SF job (if offered) and I'd live in HI and visit SF a time or two when I was in the mood. :coolgleamA: We'd never actually be in that position since my hubby feels the same way about cities as I do. :hurray: We have quite the diversity on the Hive. It's part of why I stay long after homeschooling is finished TBH. Best wishes with your decision! 5 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
3 ladybugs Posted December 17, 2015 Share Posted December 17, 2015 Something that hasn't been mentioned here is that NYC has a 1%+ income tax. That is on top of the NYS income tax and Federal.... I don't know if SF has that but if it doesn't SF would be potentially more lucrative for your family. DH was recently up for a job that sounded GREAT on paper in NYC. I was really hoping he would get it. Then we sat down and figured out the commute cost every year, minus the cost of taxes in NYC vs what he was making, then we figure out how much he would have to make just to be making what he was at the time, and realized that he would never be offered that much. So then he got a job elsewhere and now he really has a low cost for commuting, and taxes. :giggle: My point is if you are looking to move to the UWS or UES I am assuming you are talking about big bucks. We couldn't afford to live there even in a studio (studio with 2 kids and a dog, yeah that would be fun!). So when you get into those higher tax brackets 1% here or there can make a HUGE difference. I suggest you figure out basic costs on paper and make your decision based on that. I would also factor in cost for visiting family into the equation. I assume you would do that. Hawaii (which didn't impress me but to each their own) and Europe is more manageable if you have lots of disposable income regardless of where you live. 4 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aspasia Posted December 17, 2015 Author Share Posted December 17, 2015 Something that hasn't been mentioned here is that NYC has a 1%+ income tax. That is on top of the NYS income tax and Federal.... I don't know if SF has that but if it doesn't SF would be potentially more lucrative for your family. DH was recently up for a job that sounded GREAT on paper in NYC. I was really hoping he would get it. Then we sat down and figured out the commute cost every year, minus the cost of taxes in NYC vs what he was making, then we figure out how much he would have to make just to be making what he was at the time, and realized that he would never be offered that much. So then he got a job elsewhere and now he really has a low cost for commuting, and taxes. :giggle: My point is if you are looking to move to the UWS or UES I am assuming you are talking about big bucks. We couldn't afford to live there even in a studio (studio with 2 kids and a dog, yeah that would be fun!). So when you get into those higher tax brackets 1% here or there can make a HUGE difference. I suggest you figure out basic costs on paper and make your decision based on that. I would also factor in cost for visiting family into the equation. I assume you would do that. Hawaii (which didn't impress me but to each their own) and Europe is more manageable if you have lots of disposable income regardless of where you live. I thought the NYC city tax was 3.5%. And SF also has a 1.5% city tax. But NY's state taxes are higher than CA's, so it all kind of balances out...to a whole lot of extra taxes. And yeah, we wouldn't go if he didn't get big bucks. We aren't interested in taking a cut in our standard of living. :) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Posted December 17, 2015 Share Posted December 17, 2015 What may be a deal breaker or maker for any of us may be inconsequential to you, so I think you need to describe what you are looking for a bit more (and not looking for) in more detail. For me, though, when I've visited San Francisco proper, the city has always struck me as kid-unfriendly, in a way that's hard to put a finger on. I've never gotten this vibe from NYC. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KrissiK Posted December 17, 2015 Share Posted December 17, 2015 I've never been to NYC, but I've been to SF numerous times. Are you thinking about the actual city itself? The cost of living is through the roof. I lived in the East Bay (Concord) for a couple of years and, while the COL is high there, too, it's a little more reasonable and the area is more livable. Also, the SF culture may not appeal to some (trying to be diplomatic here), so, depending on your lifestyle, beliefs. Etc. you may want to investigate all that before making the move to the City itself. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kitten18 Posted December 17, 2015 Share Posted December 17, 2015 I would choose SF. I like to visit NYC but I wouldn't want to live on the East Coast. Having family closer would be a huge thing for me. We've lived far away from family for 11 years now and I'm so very tired of it. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kroe1 Posted December 17, 2015 Share Posted December 17, 2015 Just shoot me now if I had to choose either city. I do not even like visiting them. Ask your DH to find a job in a coastal Florida town. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.