Cost of living equals higher salaries...myth or maybe so (Chicago: neighborhoods, school)

[ShowYouChicago]

Hi everyone,

Do you think it is true that a city(like Chicago) with a higher cost of living pays higher wages to compensate. Or is that just a myth.

(I realize this is a very general question but I still wanted to ask it and get some general ideas on the topic.)

I am wanting to move to Chicago and change careers but I am not sure at this point what I want to do. Maybe a trade school or go back to school. So for a while, I may have to rely on customer service jobs or even restaurant work to support me and my 2 kids. Do those jobs basically pay minimum wage or a little better?

Also, any suggestions on careers, industries that are in demand? I know with the economy, things are not great anywhere but I still need to try.

Thank you

[5Lakes]

It is a myth. Usually expensive cities will pay more, but not enough to compensate for the higher cost of living. In reality expensive cities cost more because of supply and demand, not because they are driven by higher wages. If a company had to pay exorbitant salaries to its employees in a high-cost area it would probably move to a location were they could operate more cheaply. There are exceptions were certain talent pools exist in certain areas, although I would think that this is a rarity.

[grapico]

not enough to compensate... Maybe at the Charlotte to Chicago level, yes, you will see a higher salary enough to compensate... But to the MOST expensive cities like SF/NYC/LA not so much.
Chicago is pretty middle of the road.
I would work on your career change before you head to Chicago though...esp with 2 kids.

[Irishtom29]

Wages in the building trades here are higher than in most areas and make up the difference in cost of living. Guys from down south come up here and work when the halls are out of local guys and they come out ahead, even after paying for lodging and chow.

[andrew61]

Originally Posted by ShowYouChicago

Hi everyone,

Do you think it is true that a city(like Chicago) with a higher cost of living pays higher wages to compensate. Or is that just a myth.

I think it's partly true and partly myth. A lot of it depends on what field/profession you're in and on who your employer is, so your mileage may vary greatly from someone else's.

For example: Years ago, I lived in Cleveland and worked for Ameritech (which later became SBC and is now AT&T). At one point I accepted a job promotion and moved to Chicago. I found that the job opportunities for my company -- which was headquartered in Chicago at the time -- were much more numerous here than in Cleveland. But I also found that although the company paid very well by Cleveland standards, the pay scale (for smiliar positions) was barely any higher in Chicago, even though the cost of living was a lot higher here.

[Lookout Kid]

In Chicago there is no fixed "cost of living" to compare to another area, since the price variance between different neighborhoods and suburbs can be quite extreme. If you live in Lincoln Park, your cost-of-living salary increase won't make up for you actual costs. But if you live in, say, Streamwood, the cost-of-living is considerably lower.

I feel like this cost-of-living variance is more extreme in Chicago than many other cities. For instance, in the Bay Area, East Palo Alto and Oakland aren't as comparatively affordable as the rougher parts of Chicagoland.

[chirack]

Originally Posted by Lookout Kid

In Chicago there is no fixed "cost of living" to compare to another area, since the price variance between different neighborhoods and suburbs can be quite extreme. If you live in Lincoln Park, your cost-of-living salary increase won't make up for you actual costs. But if you live in, say, Streamwood, the cost-of-living is considerably lower.

I feel like this cost-of-living variance is more extreme in Chicago than many other cities. For instance, in the Bay Area, East Palo Alto and Oakland aren't as comparatively affordable as the rougher parts of Chicagoland.

I would agree. I have noticed that the price of gas is generally cheaper in the southside of the city than the north. Usually cheaper in the burbs and if you are close enough to get to indiana even cheaper there.

Things are generally most expensive downtown. My guess is thoose high land prices prompt high rents that must be made up via higer prices.

[grapico]

Originally Posted by Lookout Kid

In Chicago there is no fixed "cost of living" to compare to another area, since the price variance between different neighborhoods and suburbs can be quite extreme. If you live in Lincoln Park, your cost-of-living salary increase won't make up for you actual costs. But if you live in, say, Streamwood, the cost-of-living is considerably lower.

I feel like this cost-of-living variance is more extreme in Chicago than many other cities. For instance, in the Bay Area, East Palo Alto and Oakland aren't as comparatively affordable as the rougher parts of Chicagoland.

pretty much all of coastal california is $$$

[Lookout Kid]

Originally Posted by grapico

pretty much all of coastal california is $$$

As it should be. I just wish more of it were developed like the Bay Area instead of SoCal.

[softdev]

It's all relative. Chicago might have a high cost of living compared to Sheboygan, but it's inexpensive compared to cities on the coasts.

You aren't going to get compensated much more to do the same job, at least at our salary levels. My salary in Austin, SF, Seattle, or DC would be about the same. It would be a bit higher in NYC due to the concentration of higher paying financial companies.