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

Tech Salaries Stagnant Despite Low Unemployment: Survey

insights.dice.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 66 posts

Re: Tech Salaries Stagnant Despite Low Unemployment: Survey

#51

Post by oceanplexian »

ummonk wrote: post #37
toomuchtodo wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

$93k supporting a family (stay at home partner, two kids) is most definitely not comfortable, whether in the Midwest or the coasts. Insurance premiums alone would be ~$15k/year (pretax, but still). Throw in a mortgage or rent @ $1500/month, that's another $18k/year, you've already consumed a third of your wages.

15k/year after the employer contribution?

It depends on the state, but I would note that a huge number of states have either free, or highly subsidized healthcare for children under 18.

Re: Tech Salaries Stagnant Despite Low Unemployment: Survey

#53

Post by toomuchtodo »

oceanplexian wrote: post #51
ummonk wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

15k/year after the employer contribution?

It depends on the state, but I would note that a huge number of states have either free, or highly subsidized healthcare for children under 18.

Only if your family income is so low that you qualify for Medicaid.

> Almost every state has multiple Medicaid programs. But, as a good rule of thumb, if you make less than 100% to 200% of the federal poverty level (FPL) and are pregnant, elderly, disabled, a parent/caretaker or a child, there’s likely a program for you. And if you make less than 133% of the FPL, there’s possibly a program for you, depending on whether your state expanded under Obamacare.

https://www.policygenius.com/blog/a-state-by-state-guide-to-...

Re: Tech Salaries Stagnant Despite Low Unemployment: Survey

#54

Post by m0zg »

matco11 wrote: post #48
m0zg wrote: post #28

Job market is sort of similar to the real estate market. If you're shopping for a house (or looking for a job), it's pointless to look at the "market as a whole", because that's not the segment you're in: you're shopping for something narrow and specific. A much better statistic would be to break things down by specialization, seniority, and whether or not a person had a stint at FAANG (which, and this will be delibe…

You can apply the same reasoning, perhaps in an even simpler way, to the “low unemployment” part of the statement. “unemployment” is a stat defined at general population level, reaching well beyond the engineering space. Low unemployment means it is probably harder to hire someone out there, but it does not contain any information about how is now harder/easier to hire engineers, let alone tech engineers.

Absolutely. Talking averages is pointless on most topics where stats are presented. I always want to see both the distributions conditioned on several important variables, as well as marginalized versions thereof for each variable, but such nuance is not commonly available in public discourse. And when it is, people are shocked that it contradicts the simplistic world view they've been sold earlier.

Re: Tech Salaries Stagnant Despite Low Unemployment: Survey

#55

Post by _bxg1 »

lotsofpulp wrote: post #49
brundolf wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Presumably that amount is for living in normal places. Even in Austin TX, which has become relatively expensive, I lived quite comfortably on an entry-level salary of $65k in 2015.

Comfortable is subjective. For dual high income household, such as doctors/lawyers/engineers, if you want to raise kids in a neighborhood of similarly successful people, you’ll need to be pulling in a household $200k+ per year, even in medium CoL areas. It’s always relative, and for those that go to target schools and have lucrative careers, and their network is full of others in a similar boat, then they will be com…

That's not comfortable, that's socially-competitive. Comfortable means you never have to worry about basic needs, and you don't really have to worry about creature comforts like entertainment and hobbies. As a coworker once put it, "I just want to make enough money that I never have to think twice about getting guacamole on my Chipotle."

Re: Tech Salaries Stagnant Despite Low Unemployment: Survey

#56

Post by ummonk »

I wonder how much of this is because students don’t count in unemployment statistics. Most new grads from non-elite schools have trouble finding their first job, but do manage to line one up while they graduate. However, during the time they’re trying to line up a job, they’re effectively behaving as unemployed job seekers, rather desperate and willing to accept low wages for example.

Re: Tech Salaries Stagnant Despite Low Unemployment: Survey

#57

Post by pkaye »

VRay wrote: post #38
pkaye wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You certainly can is you bought your house 10+ years ago.

If that's the situation, maybe you should just quit your job, rent out your house, move way out to the middle of nowhere, and live off the rental profits

I'm perfectly fine where I live. I own my house and don't plan to rent it out anytime soon.

Re: Tech Salaries Stagnant Despite Low Unemployment: Survey

#58

Post by _bxg1 »

ummonk wrote: post #36
kamarg wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Er...isn't the general agreement that if you want to get rich you absolutely should not go work for or found a startup but instead get a steady job at big corp and live below your means? People are always on about how shares in a startup should be counted as $0 compensation. Not to mention $93k doesn't go very far in places with large populations and high job prospects.

Founding a startup is a decent way to get rich, although a big roll of the dice. Joining one is not though.

Depends whether you get shares, or an in with a crucial VC

Re: Tech Salaries Stagnant Despite Low Unemployment: Survey

#60

Post by souprock »

toomuchtodo wrote: post #16
_bxg1 wrote: post #10

I'd bet it's just a function of what people are willing to do the job for. $93k gives you a very comfortable lifestyle, and tech workers tend to be much more motivated by the work itself than their peers. Those who really care about getting rich will go to SV and do a startup. So there's not as much pressure for increase.

$93k supporting a family (stay at home partner, two kids) is most definitely not comfortable, whether in the Midwest or the coasts. Insurance premiums alone would be ~$15k/year (pretax, but still). Throw in a mortgage or rent @ $1500/month, that's another $18k/year, you've already consumed a third of your wages.

I'll work that out for my office, which is right by the beach in Florida. First of all, that pay would likely be for a somewhat junior position. Also, bonuses are common, but I guess I won't count that because it isn't promised.

Insurance is provided. BTW, we also add on a bit more for a 401K, in addition to whatever you might choose to contribute.

I don't know what you'd want for a home, and I don't know your credit score, but throwing some numbers into a mortgage calculator for 30-year mortgages gives me: You could pay $1250/month on a home that is 7 minutes from work, on 1.16 acres, going for $275,000. If you don't mind an older house, one on 1.3 acres (like a football field) is 11 minutes away and is selling for $320,000. That looks like $1455/month, which is almost what you propose. This might be excessive for you though; a smaller piece of land can be had for half that price unless it has a new McMansion or a waterfront.

So I think it's more realistic that housing would consume 1/6 of your wages.

Note also the lack of a state income tax. Fuel is half the price you'd pay in California.

Post reply on HN