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

2017 State of Global Tech Salaries

hired.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

111–120 of 284 posts

Re: 2017 State of Global Tech Salaries

#111

Post by CiPHPerCoder »

nilkn wrote: post #97
CiPHPerCoder wrote: post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> We live in a 680 sq ft one-bedroom apartment in an older development ($2200/mo). Whoa, that's almost double the estimated mortgage for the 5 bedroom houses with an acre of land my family has been looking at purchasing. I'll never move to the SF Bay Area. I encourage others not to, either. Get the companies there to open up to remote employees instead.

If you can get a 5 bedroom house on an acre of land for $1100/month where you're looking, then honestly real estate prices in pretty much any city are going to be a shock.

I said almost double, not exactly double. It comes up to about $1200 - $1600 depending on the property here.

I live in Florida, to boot. Real estate isn't exactly cheap here.

Re: 2017 State of Global Tech Salaries

#112

Post by rattray »

_m8fo wrote: post #102
rattray wrote: post #80

Earlier quoted context omitted.

While I struggle generally to discern what you're trying to say, I'm particularly befuddled by what "MD" refers to here.

My point is basically this: the average is being extremely skewed by survivorship bias, namely, White and Asians who attended elite schools. I assert that getting the salaries noted in the article is especially unlikely if you're on the other end of the spectrum: Women and minorities from non-elite schools. MD means medical doctor. Wages among doctors are far more predictable.

Huh, okay.

Re: 2017 State of Global Tech Salaries

#113

Post by nothrabannosir »

frgtpsswrdlame wrote: post #98
the_gastropod wrote: post #83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes. Urban areas are typically more expensive than rural areas. Maybe if urban residents stopped subsidizing unsustainable rural living, this price gap would shrink.

>Maybe if urban residents stopped subsidizing unsustainable rural living What do you mean?

Tax deductibility of mortgage interest is essentially renters subsidising homeowners.

Some countries in Europe do it, and the EU is not happy with it. I'm personally grateful they're shoving the repeal of this tax deductibility down the member nations' throats (very very controversial measure). Homeowners have a stranglehold on politics because renters don't vote enough :(

Re: 2017 State of Global Tech Salaries

#114

Post by [deleted] »

rattray wrote: post #80
_m8fo wrote: post #60

I'm legitimately interested to see how much software engineers make if they're not White or Asian. Given the lack of women and minorities I'd say minorities are better off being an MD than a SE. In addition, I'm skeptical that an average SE can get offers at places that give them this kind of compensation. --- Take Google for an example. [1] The earning "likelihood" (whether this is cultural, sociopolitical, socioeco…

While I struggle generally to discern what you're trying to say, I'm particularly befuddled by what "MD" refers to here.

[deleted]

Re: 2017 State of Global Tech Salaries

#115

Post by jorblumesea »

WhitneyLand wrote: post #70
kcorbitt wrote: post #37

This analysis may be reasonable as far as it goes, but it can still make financial sense for someone to live and work in the Bay Area. I recently took a new job near San Francisco paying ~$160k. Living cheaply, our actual consumption for my family of 3 is about ~50k a year. (Yes, this is possible -- and life can still be enjoyable if you like spending time in nature/other inexpensive activities.) After taxes, that le…

That's a tough argument to make that SF beats SLC in net savings. You should try living with your family in a house with a backyard, it's quite enjoyable and could be pretty cheap over time if you see any appreciation. Secondly there are a lot more taxes on a lot more things in SF, are you factoring that in? Also I'd bet you are worth more than 105k in SLC if you looked around longer. I love SF and it's great to live…

Same with Seattle. Houses going for 300-500k, Salaries 110k+, minimum. I really don't think it's true either for my region.

If you love the startup world, hard to beat SF.

Re: 2017 State of Global Tech Salaries

#116

Post by Retric »

frgtpsswrdlame wrote: post #98
the_gastropod wrote: post #83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes. Urban areas are typically more expensive than rural areas. Maybe if urban residents stopped subsidizing unsustainable rural living, this price gap would shrink.

>Maybe if urban residents stopped subsidizing unsustainable rural living What do you mean?

There is huge cash flow to rural areas. The problem is the same infrastructure is cheaper when shared among large groups. You need more road per person when people have 80 acres vs 0.5 acres.

Further, things like farm subsides, rural health care, and even poverty programs are just huge money sinks.

IMO, it's important to separate things that must be in rural areas vs. things that are more expensive because they are in rural areas.

Re: 2017 State of Global Tech Salaries

#117

Post by emodendroket »

s4vi0r wrote: post #45
hereiam123 wrote: post #38

And here I am making $72,000 in New Hampshire...45 minutes from Boston. I have a B.S. in computer engineering and now have 4-5 years of professional experience in software (specializing in DevOps). Am I severely underpaid?

These are the actual averages (not adjusted for SF cost of living): https://hired.com/assets/reports/state_of_salaries/img1@2x-2... IMO if you're happy where you are, and the cost of living is really low (e.g. you can buy a decent house pretty easily for under 200k), no need to be worried. Otherwise I'd probably leave and work in a big but not overly expensive city. I've seen plenty of job listings in Chicago looking…

He does not need to move anywhere to make a lot more money.

Re: 2017 State of Global Tech Salaries

#118

Post by ghaff »

nothrabannosir wrote: post #113
frgtpsswrdlame wrote: post #98

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Maybe if urban residents stopped subsidizing unsustainable rural living What do you mean?

Tax deductibility of mortgage interest is essentially renters subsidising homeowners. Some countries in Europe do it, and the EU is not happy with it. I'm personally grateful they're shoving the repeal of this tax deductibility down the member nations' throats (very very controversial measure). Homeowners have a stranglehold on politics because renters don't vote enough :(

That may be true (although there are tax deductions for renting in some places). However, people own property in cities and rent outside of cities so I'm not sure how relevant it is to the subsidy comment.

(Which presumably is some variant of the oil/cars/roads claim because cities can apparently somehow exist in isolation of everything surrounding them.)

Re: 2017 State of Global Tech Salaries

#119

Post by [deleted] »

kcorbitt wrote: post #37

This analysis may be reasonable as far as it goes, but it can still make financial sense for someone to live and work in the Bay Area. I recently took a new job near San Francisco paying ~$160k. Living cheaply, our actual consumption for my family of 3 is about ~50k a year. (Yes, this is possible -- and life can still be enjoyable if you like spending time in nature/other inexpensive activities.) After taxes, that le…

[deleted]
Post reply on HN