I currently live in Toronto, Canada as a student with my mother and I am currently debating if I should stay here or move to San Jose, California.
Apparently, the job that I'm going for here in Toronto starts off at 58k CAD which is 44k USD. If I were to get hired as the same job in San Jose, they start off at 84k USD which is 110k CAD.
It would take me literally 6 years to get up to that salary in Toronto when I start at 100k CAD in San Jose.
Though after a little bit of comparing, the cost of living in San Jose is a little bit (27%) more expensive than in Toronto. But to argue you're making much more money and the Canadian dollar is 0.76 to the American dollar.
Is it worth moving for a better possible quality of life?
what about healthcare? what about transportation? what advantages do you get in each place? The USD being a stronger currency is definitely advantageous if you go outside the country on vacation, but it's already accounted for in the cost of living (example: maybe a car will cost you 5 months of salary in canada while it costs you only 3 in the US)
What if you have kids? Is it better to raise kids in the US or in Canada?
Elijah Long
>What if you have kids? Is it better to raise kids in the US or in Canada?
Everything else in this post is sound advice but this is bullshit. OP, don't get carried away and make the wrong life decisions based on huge 'IFs'. Also, condoms and abortions already exist so you won't even have to worry.
Also >2016
>Having Children >Not losing all your money to a crazy woman Choose 1 and only 1.
Jason James
>America >Healthcare Pick one.
Austin Davis
I'm not having kids or getting married, but maybe OP wants to. I'm just giving him something to think about. When you go work somewhere, you're probably going to stay there for a very long time, not just stay a couple years. It's not unreasonable to think 10 to 15 years in advance.
Wyatt Young
You're right but I probably want one kid and get married in about 10 years from now (OP).
Chase Evans
not it's not
Reason: factor in prop 13. Namely, renters get crucified while everyone who bought homes before 2000 make bank. You, as a new resident, will have to put up with $1000+/mo rents and 90 minute commutes. And since most of the companies here are startups/new companies, you will be treated like shit and exploited at them because the turnover is so ridiculously quick (under 3 years).
No, you cannot make a fortune here and then jettison out. You'll spend maybe 5-6 years of your life fighting an uphill battle until you give up.
TL;DR The high salaries get thrown down the toilet when you factor in taxes and cost of living.
Nicholas Robinson
Also OP another thing you have to realize is that in many respects California is playing catch up. The state's infrastructure is woefully inadequate due to the hard cap on property taxes (prop 13) and the 67% vote requirement for ALL tax increases (also prop 13's doing).
This means that all roads are choked with traffic and transit networks are not nearly as expansive as they need to be. The only exception is ACE, which runs out into the tri-valley (aka desert wasteland), but even then most jobs require at least one transfer. All bridge commutes are at least an hour if not longer.
Put simply life here is hellish and you won't enjoy it. Don't move here, you WILL regret it. The only people that don't are those that bought homes 20 years ago and are sitting on shitloads of money. These people also vote against all new housing development (this is a thing that is voted on here) which causes rents to skyrocket.
Perhaps in 20 years things will be different (given that CAHSR will be built, perhaps a Caltrain tube to Oakland, also BART to SJ) but until then (2036) you won't want to move here. So don't.
Jaxon Powell
Don't move here. Rent is shit as what said. Cost of living is absurd for what they give you. This place is also literally dead in terms of interesting to do and Toronto has far more interesting people and places.
Carson Gonzalez
$3000 a month for housing Also CA takes at least 10% straight out of your check for state income tax. So unless you are frugal and have a baller job lined up I wouldn't recommend it.
Hunter Long
Same fag here. Also I wouldn't consider $90k baller in San Jose. Toronto is gorgeous. Been there myself. Why leave?
Nicholas Stewart
Some people are mentally healthy and will have kids whether you like it or not.
Daniel Walker
then again most people are retarded and irrational.
Eli Roberts
>retarded and irrational.
In 2016, if you are not a gay or lesbian couple then marrying and having kids is literally retarded and irrational, specially if you are the man in the heterosexual relation.
Levi Cooper
...
Jack Phillips
not like he's wrong user. But that belongs on /pol/ indeed. polite sage
Anthony Reed
I don't know why one wants to get married when all that money that you supposedly want to make will go down the drain if the relationship with the wife does not work out. The courts side with the women 99.99% of the time. Your money will go to her for child support and alimony. In some states there's this law where a women has to have the same type of living that she had when one was married with her. If she was used to having a life that amounted to 20 thousand a month than you would have to continue paying that amount to her after divorcing. I hope you enjoy that, OP.
Statistics show 50% of couples divorce, it is probably even more.
Reports show that divorce "agreements" are almost always "won" by the woman, which means the man has to pay the woman just for the fact that maybe once in the recent past, the woman was gracious enough to allow the man to fuck her. That will cost you 50% of your income for life, teehee.
So heterosexual marriage is literally tossing a coin and if it lands on heads then you just give half of your shit to a person you probably hate (at that point).
If that is not irrational, then you tell me what is.
Aiden Robinson
84K USD is minimum wage in San Jose if you want to, say, live indoors with plumbing and electricity. Even then it might not be enough if you aren't sharing a place with several other people.
t. A Palo Alto native
Adrian Davis
Heterosexual marriages were going downhill before homosexuality was publicly acceptable. Modern divorce rate is actually going back down. infoplease.com/ipa/A0005044.html
The rest of your argument appears to be "probability says women suck" which is useless to me.
Thanks for the more insightful post than your first, though.
Dylan Hughes
>l before homosexuality was publicly acceptable
That is not my point. Homosexuals have it better because courts seem to be biased to the favor of women. If you are a gay couple then the settlement will be equal, if you are a lesbian couple then you are both biased in favor off so again, it will be equal.
Inequality only occurs when it is a man against a woman, usually.
>"probability says women suck"
That is also not my point. Women don't suck, the establishment and their bias suck. If something was biased in my favor then I would also take advantage of it. What we need is better elected officials and new legislation that makes it illegal for such an unequal settlement after divorce.
It seems to me that you have a strawman of what my position is, probably created by your own sexism and homophobia, that you are trying to project onto me. Better luck next time, punk.
Oliver Powell
I had a "strawman" (that is not how the term is used, but I'll go with it), because again due to your initial comment you came off as a moron. Maybe you should work on that approach of yours. Deciding you're not shitposting after the fact doesn't work as well.
You're ignoring the point that divorce rate is actually decreasing since 1980~, but I'll let that go since you don't seem interested in a genuine discussion.
I think you are way too invested in the agenda of others. If marriage was on your calendar, you'd probably be looking for a spouse that has similar views of the legal system and would agree to simple terms and a prenup.
And if you did fuck it up, most would laugh that you fell for a vexatious litigant.
Aiden Morgan
If by my original post you mean >In 2016, if you are not a gay or lesbian couple then marrying and having kids is literally retarded and irrational, specially if you are the man in the heterosexual relation.
Then what is wrong with it? That is literally what I elaborated on, only that I used statistics and elaborated on what I meant. It is still completely true.
>You're ignoring the point that divorce rate is actually decreasing since 1980~
It hasn't decreased enough to be a good idea. It is still flipping a coin and then giving all your money to a stranger.
> If marriage was on your calendar, you'd probably be looking for a spouse that has similar views of the legal system and would agree to simple terms and a prenup.
But the bias of system is not even fair on its own terms. There are possible and really easy ways to disregard a pre nup in court and at that point it is a free for all.
You can research this on your own, but when I saw it the best way they were recommending was pointing to how the income shown in the prenup and the current income of your husband, at the time of the divorce, was different and therefore the pre-nup is outdated and completely useless, even though it is not.
Get a good lawyer to argue that and then get all the money you want.
If you actually care then google from the perspective of the opressor "How can I invalidate my pre-nup" will turn the scariest forum posts mankind has ever seen.
