When I was younger I had this fantasy of moving to and working in SF. Then one day a SF guy joined our company in London. Said it was foggy all the time. Totally ruined the fantasy.
If you want to make money so that you can save up a nice nest egg rather than be broke at the end of every month, London is probably the worst place to move to, unless you are working in the City or some other very high paid job, or you are lucky to have a permanent line of credit from the Bank of Mum and Dad. And not only will you be broke, you'll be living in a damp hovel shared with strangers. Kind of like being a student, but with all the responsibilities of having a job.
Why you are talking about Londen all of a sudden is beyond me, but might be some bias.
But it seems that I struck a nerve: that ‘nest egg’ is at the detriment to other people, exactly my point. The homeless pay the price for your nest egg.
The disdain for poor people is dripping from your reply. Yet you have much more in common with the homeless than with the people who pay you. You will be used and discarded as we see happening and who knows where you will end up…
Um, where did I show disdain for the homeless? On the contrary, I pointed out that London has become unaffordable for all but the rich. One might say the same of San Francisco and other cities with gross wealth disparities and sky-high rents.
A "nest egg" means "having a bit saved up" so one might have some economic security. Again, what does that have to do with the homeless?
I pointed out that cities - taking London as an example - are unaffordable to people who do not have a high salary. Yet for some reason you are attacking me for...having a high salary?
