Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Ask HN: Why is Pave legal?

news.ycombinator.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

471–480 of 523 posts

Re: Ask HN: Why is Pave legal?

#471

Post by reciprocity »

FactKnower69 wrote: post #404
olyjohn wrote: post #380

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not going to pay by card for a huge purchase, and have the card company take 3% off the top. That's just a dick move when you can just write a check that does the same thing.

it's a "dick move" to not give the guy who owns your local dealership a 3% tip when you buy a car??

That's not a tip. It's a "processing fee" assessed by credit card companies (a revenue stream). The 3% charged on top of a large purchase like a vehicle goes to the payment processing provider (the credit card company). To cover the cost of professing fees, most dealerships often offer a cash discount (meaning they will quote a lower price if paid by check).

Re: Ask HN: Why is Pave legal?

#472

Post by 7402 »

Kon-Peki wrote: post #355
llamaimperative wrote: post #311

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Now this is some remarkable gymnastics. Are you also an investor in Equifax or have some other financial interest in similar services? If not, I'm very curious to hear how you tied yourself into this knot.

I find that I have struck a nerve with some folks. I have no connection with the industry at all. But that doesn’t prevent me from understanding the implications. Equifax does this stuff because it is profitable. It is profitable because companies buy it. Companies buy it because they can put the information to use for their benefit. In doing so, some consumers are harmed and others benefit. Also, for the record: I d…

> your free time has a higher dollar-per-hour value than your work time

This doesn't seem right to me. I think it would only apply to someone who felt comfortable with the level and stability of their income.

When I was self-employed or job-hunting, I would always trade an hour of free time for an hour of employment.

Re: Ask HN: Why is Pave legal?

#473

Post by iamleppert »

If you've ever worked for a YC or Sequoia company, you're in a secret database with who you worked and how much you made that is accessible to other founders. The additional context is critical for startups to make competitive offers to startup employees. I don't see what the big deal is. If a worker is working at a company A making $80k, and they try to get a job a company B making $90k, the owner of company B needs to know they were only making $80k at their last firm, so they can make a good offer of $85k. $10k would be too much.

Re: Ask HN: Why is Pave legal?

#474

Post by Manozco »

iamleppert wrote: post #473

If you've ever worked for a YC or Sequoia company, you're in a secret database with who you worked and how much you made that is accessible to other founders. The additional context is critical for startups to make competitive offers to startup employees. I don't see what the big deal is. If a worker is working at a company A making $80k, and they try to get a job a company B making $90k, the owner of company B needs…

I am not a Lawyer, or a US resident but I highly suspect this behavior is completely illegal in Europe (and rightfully so in my mind).

Re: Ask HN: Why is Pave legal?

#475

Post by randomdata »

Retric wrote: post #391
danielmarkbruce wrote: post #282

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Small business owners aren't the target market and are likely to not use such a product. Hiring well is hard - it's not super obvious if you aren't paying enough or your company isn't desirable or what else is the cause of not seeing good candidates. While in theory you could solve that by wildly overpaying, in practice you have to be able to justify your decision to higher ups in most cases, and pointing to a tool t…

> justify your decision to higher ups What you just described is speeding up a process not increasing wages. If a company simply isn’t offering enough money they aren’t going to get the workers they want. Which then forces the company to either go without or increase their compensation, just like how every other market works. > your company isn't desirable or what else is the cause The clearest example of this princi…

> If a company simply isn’t offering enough money they aren’t going to get the workers they want.

I've never seen a worker walk away once an offer is made. Getting workers in the door in the first place is hard, though.

Which means that it is really the marketing that needs to be improved. But how...

> how every other market works.

Every other market that has suffered from this kind of marketing problem starts to publish sale data! The labour market has just been slow to catch up with everyone else here. No doubt because, historically, getting people in the door was easy. That has only somewhat recently started to change.

Re: Ask HN: Why is Pave legal?

#476

Post by tylervigen »

iamleppert wrote: post #473

If you've ever worked for a YC or Sequoia company, you're in a secret database with who you worked and how much you made that is accessible to other founders. The additional context is critical for startups to make competitive offers to startup employees. I don't see what the big deal is. If a worker is working at a company A making $80k, and they try to get a job a company B making $90k, the owner of company B needs…

> If a worker is working at a company A making $80k, and they try to get a job a company B making $90k, the owner of company B needs to know they were only making $80k at their last firm, so they can make a good offer of $85k. $10k would be too much.

I disagree wholeheartedly with this.

Re: Ask HN: Why is Pave legal?

#477

Post by [deleted] »

tylervigen wrote: post #476
iamleppert wrote: post #473

If you've ever worked for a YC or Sequoia company, you're in a secret database with who you worked and how much you made that is accessible to other founders. The additional context is critical for startups to make competitive offers to startup employees. I don't see what the big deal is. If a worker is working at a company A making $80k, and they try to get a job a company B making $90k, the owner of company B needs…

> If a worker is working at a company A making $80k, and they try to get a job a company B making $90k, the owner of company B needs to know they were only making $80k at their last firm, so they can make a good offer of $85k. $10k would be too much. I disagree wholeheartedly with this.

[deleted]

Re: Ask HN: Why is Pave legal?

#478

Post by erik_seaberg »

iamleppert wrote: post #473

If you've ever worked for a YC or Sequoia company, you're in a secret database with who you worked and how much you made that is accessible to other founders. The additional context is critical for startups to make competitive offers to startup employees. I don't see what the big deal is. If a worker is working at a company A making $80k, and they try to get a job a company B making $90k, the owner of company B needs…

It doesn't really matter so much. Company B needs to know whether to beat an offer from company C for $95k or only $80k. Your salary history only affects employers that aren't trying to compete effectively, because what you made then isn't what you could make now.

And the end of the ZIRP-driven shortage is telling us that what we used to make is not locked in forever.

Re: Ask HN: Why is Pave legal?

#479

Post by swampthing »

vasco wrote: post #452
swampthing wrote: post #321

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not talking about you, I'm talking about people in general.

You have a strange view of the world. People have limited hours to sell for money, so other than undifferentiated work (where you don't get recognized for performance), workers compete for the best jobs, and so more skilled workers will on average make more money. Another factor is that people do lots of shitty things if the money is enough. Salary is the most effective way to attract and retain people, other than if…

I think there’s a pretty big gap between “salary is the most effective way to attract and retain people” and “the only possible reason you’re not getting as many quality applicants as you might hope for is salary”. As a very basic example, your standards for quality may simply be unrealistic.

Re: Ask HN: Why is Pave legal?

#480

Post by vasco »

swampthing wrote: post #479
vasco wrote: post #452

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You have a strange view of the world. People have limited hours to sell for money, so other than undifferentiated work (where you don't get recognized for performance), workers compete for the best jobs, and so more skilled workers will on average make more money. Another factor is that people do lots of shitty things if the money is enough. Salary is the most effective way to attract and retain people, other than if…

I think there’s a pretty big gap between “salary is the most effective way to attract and retain people” and “the only possible reason you’re not getting as many quality applicants as you might hope for is salary”. As a very basic example, your standards for quality may simply be unrealistic.

There's a big gap between those two statements but I made neither of them.
Post reply on HN