If you don't want to live in a city, don't. But trying to play 'suburb' in an area where many people would like to live is pretty conceited, and does cost a ton of money:
Why? Why shouldn’t residents be able to decide the living characteristics of their own city?
There is plenty of land in the US. If prices are too high to afford to live there, residents will start moving and businesses move with them or vice versa. More businesses will start expanding to lower cost of living areas.
Some people, including myself, think that it's reasonable for the residents of Palo Alto to have more say over the local policies and goings-on in the town than non-residents.
The cost of living isn't that much lower, only housing costs are. There's more to cost-of-living than housing, and you aren't going to get food, cars, etc. significantly cheaper in low-cost areas, and in fact, many things can cost more because of the added transportation costs.
Finally, those smaller areas with very low CoL usually don't have many jobs or opportunities. There's a reason people are flocking to cities, and have been for well over a century.
You’re minimizing housing cost as both how large of a percentage of budget item it is for most people and how drastically different housing costs are in most of the country compared to the west coast.
I live in metro Atlanta - not exactly a small town with a lack of opportunity. You can buy a 2800 square foot house for less than $200K not to far out from the city center. But there are a lot of people who go years without ever going into the actual city of Atlanta and live and work in the burbs.
My wife and I just bought a house two years ago in the northern burbs - a brand new build, 3100 square feet, 5-3-1/2 with a large office and all of the trimmings for less than $350K - 5% down because that’s what the builder asked for.
A similar house the large west coast tech hubs would go for well over a $1.25 million.
As far as jobs, I’ve lived here for two decades and have never had a problem finding a software development job.
Despite what people on HN seem to think, the rest of the country is not some vast wasteland where people live in poverty.
Minneapolis is really the same way. The twin cites have a very bimodal distribution. There’s high density in the two downtown areas and the corridor between them, but a good portion (most?) of the office jobs are actually located on the 494/694 ring. So you have lots of 2nd ring suburbs with good commutes for most of their residents. And we aren’t space constrained in any way by geography so construction keeps suburb house prices reasonable. But the city does need a bit more, especially with the growth of all of the universities.
True, people may earn less in smaller areas but the cost of living is much lower.