Places

[benlehman]

It's time once again to play the "where should Ben live" game.

I and the Girl are considering living in three different places, from this winter to next fall (after that we'll, if we're still a "we," be headed to whatever school will have her.) We're looking at living in Boston, SF Bay Area, or London. What's going on is that she's doing grad school preperations and studying for the Foreign Service Exam, and I'm (hopefully) working and continuing to run my publishing company. So job availability, etc, is a good thing. London is advantageous as she has an aunt that lives there, who would put her up, but probably not me.

Anyway, I know that there are people who've lived in all these places, and do presently, so ... convince me where to go! I've lived in the Boston area and Bay Area before, but never been to England. Why does one place rock more than another?

Comments

[pete-darby.livejournal.com]

I will warn that London is very much "teh expensive"; I've just moved away from Southern England for that reason. If you can't get relatives to put you up, I'd think just the accomodation costs would be enough to put most folks off.

[benlehman.livejournal.com]

Are there available small service jobs which can be used to pay for rent and board?

yrs--
--Ben

[pete-darby.livejournal.com]

You'll be competing with a shedload of folks in the twilight regions of legality from the far flung corners of our former empire, many of whom will have far lower living costs, to put it as tactfully as I can.

Or, another way, how desparate are you to live in London? Because I think you'd have to be desparate to come here without pretty well paid employment. And you'll be competing with folks who are REALLY desparate to be there.

But, if you can find work that pays for your living costs, it rocks. Not as hard as Liverpool, IMHO, but I'm deeply biased, as I've found my favourite pub in Liverpool.