Follow Slashdot stories on Twitter

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Businesses The Almighty Buck Technology

The Best and Worst Cities To Live in For Tech Workers, Based on Rent and Commute (qz.com) 253

Posted by msmash from the what's-out-there dept.
An anonymous reader shares a report: Most cities with a cluster of tech companies can offer those workers either a short commute or low rents -- but not both, according to a study by property consultancy Savills. Berlin is the exception to that rule. Savills found that the German capital offers tech workers some of the lowest rents and among the shortest commutes of 22 cities it surveyed. Commuting is a hugely important factor for worker satisfaction. One study, by the UK's Office of National Statistics, found that each additional minute of commuting increased workers' anxiety and reduced their satisfaction with life. Based on how long it takes to get to work.
The five best cities are: Austin (16 mins), Melbourne, Stockholm, Berlin, and Tokyo (24 mins).
Five worst cities: Bengaluru (47 mins), Hong Kong, Seattle, Seoul, and Toronto (40 mins).

Based on how much tech workers pay in rent (per week).
Best cities: Seoul ($153), Santiago, Berlin, Buenos Aires, and Cape Town ($192).
Five worst cities: San Francisco (with $775.45), New York, Boston, London, and Singapore ($488.16).
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

The Best and Worst Cities To Live in For Tech Workers, Based on Rent and Commute More

The Best and Worst Cities To Live in For Tech Workers, Based on Rent and Commute

Comments Filter:

  • Yeah about Stockholm... (Score:3)

    by Orphis ( 1356561 ) on Tuesday March 28, 2017 @01:13PM (#54128935)

    It's all great that it takes 24 minutes, but in general, it's quite hard to find a place to rent long term. So if you're a foreign worker, good luck competing with the locals who have been in queues to get a 1st hand contract rental for many years already...

    So well, if you can't move there, you're not part of the statistics of course!

  • I'm in a Canadian city comparable to Toronto on the list. I'm not understanding how they calculate rent at $334 (rounded). Is that per square foot of the shop?? Or the average rent the tech workers pay? If the latter, then the report needs a healthy grain of doubt. I have not heard of a $334/month rent in Canada for 20+ years. I think the going rate for rent in cities like Toronto are near $1000/month. The article doesn't really clarify how they got the rent numbers. Anyone from Toronto want to give
    • I see - another comment in another thread revealed the trick.. The listed rents are per WEEK, not per month.
    • Based on other comments on here, the $334 is not per month, but per week. That equals out to $1447 per month, if you do 334*52 / 12.

  • I well remember, many years ago, seeing a job advertisement in the British "Daily Telegraph". It was for a job at some college in Melbourne, and it ended along these lines:

    "Accomodation provided at xyz - 85 miles from Melbourne (one hour's drive)".

  • Thanks, I'll pass on all of them (Score:5, Insightful)

    by MrLogic17 ( 233498 ) on Tuesday March 28, 2017 @01:22PM (#54129041) Journal

    I live in the mid-west, and until a recent job change, had a shorter commute than everything in that list - plus a 3 bed house for less than the vast majority of that list. My income is on par with national averages for my job title, yet I have a vastly below average cost of living.

    For the life of me, I can't fathom why anyone would want to live in a big city. Every perk I hear touted, I can beat. It's quiet, I have a yard, and I have more spending money that the saps choking on smog.

    • Re:Thanks, I'll pass on all of them (Score:5, Informative)

      by WrongMonkey ( 1027334 ) on Tuesday March 28, 2017 @01:49PM (#54129313)
      Most important perk to living a in a big city: social life. Finding people who have common interests gets easier as population density increase.

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by mishehu ( 712452 )
        And yet cities can be vast oceans of lonely people unable to connect.
        • Poetic irony is appreciated, but are people in rural areas really any better off?

          • Re: (Score:2)

            by mishehu ( 712452 )
            I'd say it depends heavily on *how* rural. I personally picked the area I live in because it is on the edge between rural and suburban. So I'm close enough to the city that if I want to be around people, it's easy. But I really do enjoy the peace and quiet back on my property. Only problem I do currently have is the typical lack of internet options given that the lots around here average about 1 1/2 acre per, and mine is significantly larger.
            • Making and maintaining meaningful relationships usually takes more than just "being around people". If relationships are not your priority, then I'm glad you have a situation that works out for you. But please understand that most humans being place higher value on the social aspects of life.

    • Re:Thanks, I'll pass on all of them (Score:4)

      by geek ( 5680 ) on Tuesday March 28, 2017 @01:52PM (#54129339)

      Yep. I moved to Idaho and can relate. I grew up in Silly Con Valley and will never go back. I won't even visit I hate that place so much. I earn more here, I have a cost of living thats 60% less than it was there and the people are chill. My commute is about 26 minutes though but thats by choice as I chose to move further out of town than most.

    • For the life of me, I can't fathom why anyone would want to live in a big city. Every perk I hear touted, I can beat. It's quiet, I have a yard, and I have more spending money that the saps choking on smog.

      I'd like to take a crack at this.

      We have major league sports teams. Of course, if you don't like sports, that's not a selling point for you. We have symphony orchestra and museums if you like the artsy side of things. We have restaurants that are fancier that Wendy's. We have pizza places that aren't just Papa John's. We also have Asian restaurants that only serve Japanese food or only serve Thai food and so on. Check out the Oatmeal cartoon on Asian food in a small town here :
      http://theoatmea [theoatmeal.com]

      • I'll grant you restaurant variety will suffer the smaller the town. That said I live in a place with a population of less than half a million and we've got several Thai places, numerous Korean joints, at least one Japanese eatery I'm aware of, and a couple Indian places. Honestly if there is anything we're really lacking it's good ethnic European foods.

        We've got museums and a quality playhouse that puts on shows regularly. Little to no pro sports teams thankfully, though the plague of collegiate sports abou

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by dave562 ( 969951 )

      I agree. I live in the Pacific Northwest and previously lived in Irvine, California. I brought my job with me when I moved to my town of ~18,000 people. It is great to be making a California salary with a "small" town cost of living.

      I am close enough (20-30 minute drive) to the nearest big city that I can go do all of that nonsense when I feel the urge to. The rest of the time, I have a nice house, a good sized yard and mellow neighbors.

    • Every perk I hear touted, I can beat. It's quiet, I have a yard

      Shit I can beat that easily. No yard, and the place is a constant place of fun and loud energy. I also own a house in the burbs, but leave that to the boring renters, and live in the city. Many of us chose to live in a big city because what you see as "perks" others see as a lifeless drag.

      As my colleague (also big city boy) always says. People sleep in suburbs, people live in cities.

    • I live in the mid-west, and until a recent job change, had a shorter commute than everything in that list - plus a 3 bed house for less than the vast majority of that list. My income is on par with national averages for my job title, yet I have a vastly below average cost of living.

      For the life of me, I can't fathom why anyone would want to live in a big city. Every perk I hear touted, I can beat. It's quiet, I have a yard, and I have more spending money that the saps choking on smog.

      Because the job pool is greater within a 45-minute commute ratio. When shit hits the fan (which always happens) it is best to have several dozen leads as opposed to just 3 or 4 at the most in the middle of nowhere. I've had colleagues that moved to charming, lower-cost towns to work with that one great employer. Then, shit, poof! Gig is gone and now have to commute 2-3 hours to the big city because they have a house, kids are in school and wife is working in that charming lower-cost town.

      I've been in this

  • RENT ?!! Like some SERF?!!1!


    also, TIL my 45-minute commute is in the "worst" range, with living out in the hinterlands of flyover country.

  • It's strange to me that they mention Cape Town, but not Johannesburg, where arguably the majority of South Africa's (if not the continent's) tech work is done.

    The article also is a bit quiet on how they do the exchange rate and cost-of-living conversions between the different countries.

  • Comment removed based on user account deletion

  • San Jose must be in the middle... (Score:3)

    by __aaclcg7560 ( 824291 ) on Tuesday March 28, 2017 @01:32PM (#54129169)
    I pay $1466 for a studio apartment and make $50K+ per year in IT support in Palo Alto. If I had a car, it would take me 20 minutes in the morning and 45 to 90 minutes in the afternoon. By taking the express bus (one hour each way) for an extra $70 per month, I get read The Wall Street Journal in the morning and an ebook in the afternoon. Why drive when others can drive for you?

    • I pay $1466 for a studio apartment and make $50K+ per year in IT support in Palo Alto. If I had a car, it would take me 20 minutes in the morning and 45 to 90 minutes in the afternoon. By taking the express bus (one hour each way) for an extra $70 per month, I get read The Wall Street Journal in the morning and an ebook in the afternoon. Why drive when others can drive for you?

      I think the real concern is that you're spending 35% of your salary on rent, and that's before taxes.

      • I think the real concern is that you're spending 35% of your salary on rent, and that's before taxes.

        That's the lowest it has been in years. There were times in the past when I had to pay 50% for rent, which isn't unusual in Silicon Valley or other metropolitan areas. But I live a very modest lifestyle.

      • How did you find a studio for so cheap? The best I could find while looking this past couple months is $2500/mo for a studio. :|

        • How did you find a studio for so cheap?

          I got my studio apartment in 2005 after the dot com bust and everyone moved out of Silicon Valley. Since the apartment complex was built before 1978, the city of San Jose limited rent increases to 8% per year (recently reduced to 5% per year). Back then I paid $810 per month, $199 for deposit and got a free microwave oven for signing a one-year lease. My current rent of $1,466 per month is $300 per month below the "luxury" rates that's currently being charged.

  • Actually clicked through to the article, only to skip reading just about any of it.
    • There really wasn't much to this particular article...Are you a troll?
      • I mean, I guess. Although maybe I'm the one who is being trolled by all the commenters who said that the article had to be bullshit because the rent numbers couldn't possibly be accurate, without reading the title of the graph that indicated that the rent amount was weekly, not monthly.

  • Come to Cape Breton, Nova Scotia (Score:4, Informative)

    by xtal ( 49134 ) on Tuesday March 28, 2017 @01:43PM (#54129263)

    Humble homes available well under $100k CDN, some for less than $50k CDN.. ...all with gigabit fiber to the home, 5 minutes no traffic to an airport with direct flights to Toronto. (2h 30m).

    Enjoy the cities. I'm living the good life. You can too, if you can work remotely in Canada!

  • Vancouver Missing (Score:3)

    by Erioll ( 229536 ) on Tuesday March 28, 2017 @01:48PM (#54129309)
    Vancouver is massive for Tech in Canada... and I turned down $50,000 more money because I'd have to get a tiny apartment to be within an HOUR of where I'd work, for comparable money to a house just about anywhere else except Toronto. That Vancouver wasn't on this list is very very weird.

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by A5un ( 586681 )
      Vancouver is not massive at all for tech, compared to Seattle, only 2h due South by car. And if you go further south to Bay area, then it's a whole other world of massive. I know because I've lived in those places. Note that everything is at least twice as expensive in Bay area compared to Vancouver, including the pay.

  • Tulsa (Score:3)

    by T.E.D. ( 34228 ) on Tuesday March 28, 2017 @01:58PM (#54129399)

    Just crunched the numbers for my hometown [usnews.com] (Tulsa, OK). Both the average rents ($175/month) and the average commute (21.3 minutes) would be in their top 5.

    Yeah, we're not exactly a famous tech hub. But we do have a pretty decent concentration of telecommunications and flight simulation work here. Enough to keep me employed and happy with my 15-30 minute commute and my house that would cost $3.5 Million in San Fran.

  • questionable source material (Score:3, Insightful)

    by sloth_jr ( 19344 ) on Tuesday March 28, 2017 @01:58PM (#54129413)

    The full Savills report (http://pdf.euro.savills.co.uk/global-research/tech-cities-2017.pdf) doesn't really mention how they selected the "top 22 cities", only how the cities they selected rank comparatively and the metrics they used to differentiate them. A cynic might be inclined to think that a "property consultancy" is mostly interested in pitching cities they have active property in.

    Since one of the advantages of "tech" (let's just call them software startups) is the possibility of remote working, maybe the answer to the "top 22 cities" to do tech in is - the one you live and work in already?

  • Meaningless? (Score:5, Interesting)

    by bradley13 ( 1118935 ) on Tuesday March 28, 2017 @02:50PM (#54129749) Homepage

    Isn't this kind of meaningless?

    "The pattern of a trade-off between rent and length of commute is evident when you look at the cities with the cheapest rent and shortest commutes. Workers in Austin only have an average 16-minute commute to work, but pay among the highest rents at $476 a week. Workers in Seoul, meanwhile, pay the lowest rent, $153 a week, but have to endure a 40-minute commute, the fourth longest on the list."

    In virtually any city, each individual makes that trade-off for themselves. Live farther out, have a longer commute but cheaper rent. Live close in, have a short commute but higher rent.

    OT: Austin used to be a lovely city, before it was "discovered". Now it's a satellite of California, both in terms of size (and horrible traffic), and in terms of progressive politics. Californian refugees are repeating the same mistakes that drove them out of CA - pushing things like "light rail", "rent control" and all the rest. Whipping up SJW outrage, for example, the recent survey claiming that 15% of UT undergraduates are raped (the trick: "verbal pressure" counts as rape). A sad fate for a once-nice Texas city.

  • rent in Seoul (Score:5, Informative)

    by godrik ( 1287354 ) on Tuesday March 28, 2017 @02:50PM (#54129751)

    I am not sure it makes sense to talk about rent in Seoul, Korea. Many people are living on the jeonse system where you give a massive security deposit that the landlord will invest (and give you back when you leave) in exchange for the rent to be very low or even free.

    So speaking of "rent" might be very biased. Any Korean around to give feed back on these numbers?

    • Re: (Score:2, Informative)

      by Anonymous Coward

      You are correct, that most families will be living on the (ridiculous and arcane) Jeon-Se system (if they don't own their apartment unit, that is).

      Under the Jeon-Se system, there is no periodic rental payments. It's just one big lump sum at the start, which you get back when you leave.

      The rental figures for Seoul, therefore, will most likely only represent people living alone in studio apartments.

  • What about salary comparison? Places with higher rent tend to involve higher salary (though not necessarily proportionally so). Without an indication of salary, the rental prices provide little useful data.

  • It is sad that the cost of rent and not the cost of a house / mortgage is being used as a benchmark when talking about IT, which is usually considered a higher paying profession. The concept that higher paying professions aren't assumed by default as leading you to property / home ownership is worrying. Yes, I get that "IT" spans a wide range from low level call center work to senior level architects, but nonetheless, it is a sad statement on the state of our world.

Slashdot Top Deals

Ocean: A body of water occupying about two-thirds of a world made for man -- who has no gills. -- Ambrose Bierce

Close