Hacker News Reader

Comment by blondie9x | Hacker News Reader

A lot of the cost of living calculations are wrong. I had moved from LA paying 1400$ a month rent to Austin and paid nearly the same rent in Austin for a one bedroom. The plus is no income tax in Washington and Texas but food costs are more and property taxes are double in Texas when compared to California.

View on HN

On the other hand, Austin is on average more expensive than Dallas, Houston, San Antonio, etc. So using Austin as representative of the whole state understates the cost of living adjustment.

Austin city is increasingly expensive to live in. Fortunately, the city is in the middle of land that is open on all sides for a considerable range, and there are very affordable options just outside the city. If planned properly, this can result in relatively easy commutes for little cost of living. The property tax lessens considerably in neighboring cities and counties, as well. The lack of state income tax is also a huge boon. I also disagree that food costs are higher in Austin.

you could say the same about SF and LA. but how far are you willing to go? problem is for austin these areas are included in cost living considerations.

That's true. You just don't have to go as far out in Austin or adjacent cities. Certainly housing is affordable to buy in Austin city and surrounding, on even one modest tech salary. I don't think the same is true in SF/bay area or LA. Austin is very expensive in a small central core, but drops off considerably only a small number of miles away.

Property tax is lower in seattle. %1.2-1.5 effective vs %1 effective. If youve had a big price gain only then is California 'cheaper'

For cost of home ownership, Austin beats LA hands down.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com