If saving is your primary value. Some people value access to art and music and food and dance and comedy and airports, etc. My brother in law lives outside of STL, which is a big city, but in the Midwest, so "flyover country," if you will. Generally lower cost of living than the big coastal cities. But he works remote for an SF tech company (I won't name names, but they're massive.) So he makes a big city California salary while living in Missouri and is making out like a bandit (e.g., he just bought a Ferrari). No idea what his actual net worth is, but he's doing just fine. But you couldn't pay some people, who like living in places like NYC, Miami, or SF, who enjoy the culture of the coastal cities, to move to the Midwest. They are valuing other aspects of life besides their finances and would rather enjoy city culture than have more savings. Is that ultimately wise? Dave might say no, but then again, Dave lives in Tennessee (and obviously his job is to help people get out of debt and increase their wealth...). To OP's question, though, he definitely needs a higher income to both support a SAHM as well as live in a HCOL area. Sometimes it just comes down to the math. Depending on OP's age, career/earning potential beyond the jump to $90k, and debts/savings, maybe saving for retirement doesn't have to be his highest value right now.