There's so many people who seem to think that the solution to the crazy SF rental market is: move to Seattle, Austin or Pittsburgh! They're the best of both worlds; they've got big-city opportunities and small-town traffic/rents! The only problem is that if everyone does that, then Seattle, Austin and Pittsburgh will all become as expensive and congested as San Francisco.
One of the things that annoys me is that none of these cities are making any meaningful effort to learn from the problems that the SF Bay Area has encountered.
It's easy to design a transportation system for a small town, and it's easy to make housing affordable in a small town. But try to scale that up to a big city and then things get difficult. You can't have everyone drive to work in a big city, without having horrible congestion. You can't easily make housing more affordable when large numbers of existing homeowners vote down any policies they think will make their property values will go down, or change their neighborhood in some way that makes it a little different from how it was at whatever period that they moved there.
None of these cities has a good public transit system. Austin is the worst. Even Seattle only has some buses and one "train" line (it's really a tram, not a train) so this does not count IMO.
So tech workers could move to one of these cities, and maybe they'll even be lucky enough to delay the problem long enough that they can pass it on to their children. But what I really hope will happen is that Bay Area voters will vote for politicians that want to provide better public transport, and build more housing supply. And that voters in Seattle, Austin and Pittsburgh will do the same, and avoid running into these problems in the first place.