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

Canada's Tech Firms Capitalize On Immigration Anxiety

npr.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

181–190 of 302 posts

Re: Canada's Tech Firms Capitalize On Immigration Anxiety

#181

Post by bogomipz »

stale2002 wrote: post #134
bogomipz wrote: post #81

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>"I hate SF/SiValley. I would love nothing more than to go home, but I'm not about to take a paycut that's measured in multiples of the median Canadian salary." This is an honest question - is it worth living somewhere you "hate" for increased pay? Why not take less money and live in place that would make you happy?

Depends on the price. Everyone has one. (or at least SHOULD have one). Here is an example. Would you accept 100 million dollars to work in Saudia Arabia for a year? I probably would. I'd do it for a year, and then retire. People do lots of things where they are exchanging happiness now, for happiness in the future. For him, it means that he can save up a whole bunch of money, and then retire 20 years earlier at the l…

>"Depends on the price. Everyone has one. (or at least SHOULD have one)"

No, not everyone has a price for which they are willing to exchange their happiness for.

I also completely disagree that everyone "should" have a price they are willing to exchange their happiness for. It's strikes me as quite odd that you choose to pronounce these things(your opinions) as universal and absolute truths.

There are many people who work jobs that offer them happiness at the expense of lower pay. Artists, teachers, journalists, social service workers are all examples of this. I recently met some Americans and Britons who were working in tech in Berlin. Even though they could make a better salary back home they chose Berlin because the quality of life there makes them happier. So no, not "everybody" has a price.

>"Here is an example. Would you accept 100 million dollars to work in Saudia Arabia for a year?"

This is a total straw man. The OP actually stated that they were able to triple their salary by working in SV/SF. How is that at all comparable with being able to retire as one of the most wealthy people on the planet after 1 year? You are comparing a possible practical reality with a fantasy.

Also along with tripling one's salary by working in SV/SF comes a higher tax bracket and probably triple what you would pay in rent in the most expensive Canadian tech hub. It's not very realistic to think that you are going to retire 20 years earlier on just a SF/SV salary, not even close.

Re: Canada's Tech Firms Capitalize On Immigration Anxiety

#182

Post by linkregister »

bogomipz wrote: post #181
stale2002 wrote: post #134

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Depends on the price. Everyone has one. (or at least SHOULD have one). Here is an example. Would you accept 100 million dollars to work in Saudia Arabia for a year? I probably would. I'd do it for a year, and then retire. People do lots of things where they are exchanging happiness now, for happiness in the future. For him, it means that he can save up a whole bunch of money, and then retire 20 years earlier at the l…

>"Depends on the price. Everyone has one. (or at least SHOULD have one)" No, not everyone has a price for which they are willing to exchange their happiness for. I also completely disagree that everyone "should" have a price they are willing to exchange their happiness for. It's strikes me as quite odd that you choose to pronounce these things(your opinions) as universal and absolute truths. There are many people who…

Rent, but not house price. Toronto and Vancouver meet or exceed SF Bay Area house prices. Rents are lower there, yes.

Re: Canada's Tech Firms Capitalize On Immigration Anxiety

#183

Post by GuiA »

inputcoffee wrote: post #119
ohhhwell wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Unrelated tangent: It always baffle me how people view exchange rate as something that can "eat away your salary" and when you see people making statements like "it's so expensive in the UK, a pound is like 130% of a dollar". Makes me wonder if people who are only used to currencies that are roughly on the same scale view currencies in a different way than people who are used to 10x / 100x differences in currencies.…

I always use the example of Japan. $1 = 109 Yen, so do people think Japan costs 1/100th of what the US does? Japan is a good example because people have an idea that it is a rich, expensive country.

I don’t think anyone but the daftest people think that Japan costs 1/100th of what the US does.

Living in Japan with a Japanese lifestyle is not that expensive. I have many Japanese friends living in Tokyo for under $1.5-2k a month. They’re not living in luxury, but they quite enjoy their lives, travel every once in a while, etc. You won’t be doing that in SF (and Tokyo is a much more pleasant city than SF in more ways than one).

On the other hand, living an american lifestyle in Japan (big car, big house, eating lots of red meat, buying imported American goods, etc) is going to cost you a lot of money though.

Re: Canada's Tech Firms Capitalize On Immigration Anxiety

#184

Post by winter_blue »

stale2002 wrote: post #133
binarymax wrote: post #78

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'd open up all the borders without restriction. It would be a madhouse for the first decade but then the world would be much better off in the long run. It would be the first step in a united planet rather than the pettiness we suffer now with individual competing states.

Uhh, how about instead, we let Europe do that. And then us in America and Canada can see how that works out for them. The beauty of countries is that different countries can try vastly different things, and then we can look at the results afterwords and see which countries made good decisions and which made bad decisions.

Well, the United States is a living example of a country that tried that, and um ... hasn't failed because of it.

Until the Chinese Exclusion Act of 1882, there were no restrictions on immigration. And after that, the immigration of white people was still completely unrestricted, until the Immigration Act of 1921. And after which, it was still relatively easy for citizens from Western European countries to move to the US (thanks to the "National Origins formula", up until the Immigration Act of 1965 was passed.

Re: Canada's Tech Firms Capitalize On Immigration Anxiety

#185

Post by xordon »

alacombe wrote: post #167
rb808 wrote: post #101

I dont understand the hate on Canadian salaries. Its a safer, more liberal country that looks after its poorest. If you want cut throat lifestyle that pays the most - with the guy who cooked you dinner keeping one eye out for an ICE van, your ex-slaves in prison and some homeless guy going through your dumpster - you'll love the US. If you want to live a fairer society (Canada, France, Germany, Australia etc) don't c…

> I dont understand the hate on Canadian salaries. Its a safer, more liberal country that looks after its poorest. No, it doesn't. "It" prefers to import "refugees" en-masse and giving them free shit, rather than fix poverty for Canadians.

I don't see how blaming refugees is helpful.

Re: Canada's Tech Firms Capitalize On Immigration Anxiety

#186

Post by winter_blue »

vetinari wrote: post #25
binarymax wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because the pickiness is a stereotype and a form of discrimination. EDIT - removed the "arbitrary", which I could argue for but for the purposes of the discussion concede. I stand by the rest of the claim despite the downvotes :)

You don't have an inherent right to enter a random country. People living there have to decide, who they allow to enter and who not. Usually, they set up a set of rules to decide, and it is up to them how these rules reflect their values.

And you absolutely don't have the right to threaten me with violence and harm with the aim of blocking me from inviting my non-citizen friend from staying at my house, in my property -- which is the despicable (and immoral) unquestioned status quo of today. Simply because you belong to a majority (or minority) of the citizens of my country, does not give you the right to dictate who I can hire, who I can invite into my home, etc.

For libertarian arguments underpinning this fundamentally moral and human rights issue, see https://openborders.info/

Re: Canada's Tech Firms Capitalize On Immigration Anxiety

#187

Post by linkregister »

rb808 wrote: post #101

I dont understand the hate on Canadian salaries. Its a safer, more liberal country that looks after its poorest. If you want cut throat lifestyle that pays the most - with the guy who cooked you dinner keeping one eye out for an ICE van, your ex-slaves in prison and some homeless guy going through your dumpster - you'll love the US. If you want to live a fairer society (Canada, France, Germany, Australia etc) don't c…

It's interesting that some cultures equate low GINI with fairness, while others equate fewer barriers to success with fairness. In this case, yes, per capita the countries you mentioned take better care of their poor.

On the other hand, what is the link between a high salary and an immigrant being deported? Between higher rates of homelessness? Between higher rates of incarceration?

The reason why I ask is because the tax burden of a software engineer in California is equivalent to one in Vancouver. Deportations and incarceration are contrary to tax savings. Fewer community and welfare services, leading to homelessness, are linked to tax expenditures, but the U.S. historically has large population groups that have practically always suffered poverty.

Anyway, I agree that the U.S. can do better, but see almost no causal link between high salaries for one profession and the problems you mentioned (except maybe a higher corporate tax to eat the delta of the higher added value per employee). Hmm. Canada has a 15% corporate tax rate, lower than the U.S.

Re: Canada's Tech Firms Capitalize On Immigration Anxiety

#188

Post by linkregister »

MichaelGG wrote: post #177
rb808 wrote: post #101

I dont understand the hate on Canadian salaries. Its a safer, more liberal country that looks after its poorest. If you want cut throat lifestyle that pays the most - with the guy who cooked you dinner keeping one eye out for an ICE van, your ex-slaves in prison and some homeless guy going through your dumpster - you'll love the US. If you want to live a fairer society (Canada, France, Germany, Australia etc) don't c…

>ICE van No, because in Canada the acronym is CBSA. Anyways I don't see how these follow each other at all. What's shitty tech salaries in Canada to do with any of this?

I think there's some zero-sum-game thinking involved, with some U.S. trending news black eyes thrown in there for rhetorical effect.

Re: Canada's Tech Firms Capitalize On Immigration Anxiety

#189

Post by stale2002 »

bogomipz wrote: post #181
stale2002 wrote: post #134

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Depends on the price. Everyone has one. (or at least SHOULD have one). Here is an example. Would you accept 100 million dollars to work in Saudia Arabia for a year? I probably would. I'd do it for a year, and then retire. People do lots of things where they are exchanging happiness now, for happiness in the future. For him, it means that he can save up a whole bunch of money, and then retire 20 years earlier at the l…

>"Depends on the price. Everyone has one. (or at least SHOULD have one)" No, not everyone has a price for which they are willing to exchange their happiness for. I also completely disagree that everyone "should" have a price they are willing to exchange their happiness for. It's strikes me as quite odd that you choose to pronounce these things(your opinions) as universal and absolute truths. There are many people who…

"Artists, teachers, journalists, social service workers" Sure. And if someone offered any of those people 100 million dollars, to work at a job that they liked moderately less than their current job for a single year, it is a universal truth that they should do it (unless they already have a billion in the bank I guess).

It is not about trading happiness for money. It is about trading a small amount of happiness NOW for a large amount of happiness later or a large amount of ability to achieve your goals.

If you are a teacher/Journalist/artist who wants the world to be more educated, more informed, or more artistically enriched, you are universally better able to achieve those goals with 100 million dollars in the bank.

So yes. Everyone SHOULD have a price. Maybe that price is 100 million dollars. Maybe it is 10 thousand. But a price is a price.

But back to the actual question at hand. Yes, i do believe that tripling your salary could lead to you retiring 20 years earlier.

It is simple math, really. Even with the increase in taxes, you will have about double at least the total amount of take home pay. And if you have a ~40 year work life, but take home twice as much money after taxes, that means you only have to work ~20 years to make the same amount of after taxes income.

Call it 15 years to be more conservative. But the numbers are close.

Re: Canada's Tech Firms Capitalize On Immigration Anxiety

#190

Post by linkregister »

devopsforlyfe wrote: post #151
linkregister wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think that the market would care about professionally-certified coders. Accountants need to adhere to local and federal laws for GAAP accounting. Lawyers need to be familiar with local laws where they practice, and courts are gatekeepers to the practice of law. Doctors' specialization is protected by law for safety and liability purposes. Paralegals and specialized software is a market response to the bottlen…

> Doctors' specialization is protected by law for safety and liability purposes. Yet programmers writing embedded software for medical devices are not regulated for safety and reliability purposes, as far as I know. Why is that?

Historical reasons, most computer engineers and electrical engineers never bother to get their PE. Medical devices also have their own robust set of liability laws. Quality control is exhaustive, for the most part. (Security vulnerabilities excepted)
Post reply on HN