Big Sky really ain't a town, per se. It's a place for vacation homes and those that build/clean/sell them. I know many people who do live there year-round, but they're there for other things than skiing. And they pretty much all have the financial security to choose that life. If you are not fully enslaved to Boyne, MLB, or the Club, i.e. "fully" = year-round work, or if you didn't buy a house there prior to 1985, then it is hard to make ends meet there without being independently financially secure. And a lot of the jobs pay *really* low, because there is always another planeload of Brazilians who will work for less then you, gringo.
Bozeman is a college town with a small (but growing?) tech sector, but it's quite a drive from Big Sky. I do it regularly, but at this point in the season, it's getting old. Bridger is closer, but I happen to work down there, so.... But, the non-skiing side of life in Bozeman is better.
If you really want "ski town," then...well, what does that mean to you? Big resorty sort of place? Big mountain with state-of-the-art lifts/grooming? That kind of place? Then go to Colorado. Big glitzy ski towns with the full spread of authentic to manufactured atmosphere. Just choose what you like. There's a reason CO is *the* ski bum destination.
Or do you want awesome, dependable skiing and don't care how "cool" the town or mountain is? Hell, I'd say go to Anaconda then. Just down the road is some of the best undiscovered skiing in America (pun intended).
But if you want to make a good living in a comfortable four-season town close to good skiing, then....as other have said: SLC, Seattle/Puget Sound, Vancouver (BC), Portland, Bend, Boulder, Coeur d'Alene, Reno, Burlington...