The trope that SF is more expensive than the rest of the Bay Area isn’t even true, at least not anymore. I pay $1650 for a studio apartment in a decent neighborhood near a tech shuttle stop. That’s cheaper than Stanford’s student housing in Palo Alto.
I pay $4700/month for an architecturally magnificent 5BR 2200 square foot house on the block east of the Berkeley Bowl. I suppose it's not cheap on an absolute scale, but a comparable house in SF would be $8000/month at the very minimum and in Pacific Heights or the Marina or a neighborhood I don't want to live in. I think you're underestimating the cost of San Francisco right now.
Berkeley is more expensive than Silicon Valley, but it has all of the amenities of a major metropolis (except late night anything) while being quite small in the scheme of things. It's still absolutely not a place to go for a way cheap alternative to a city, as it's still one of the most expensive areas in the USA.
I think you overestimate how far $150k will go in SF ;)
The point is about what people are willing to pay to live in an area, though. The fact that people are willing to pay so much more to live in the Bay Area is revealing.
reply