Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm seeing the same thing in Australia. These new tech companies/existing companies were not here for the first wave of offshoring engineers many years ago. basically, the product/service degraded and they brought the product/service back onshore. It's a cycle that will repeat. Product degrades, there will be public outrage, then they will onshore the product to fix the problems caused from offshoring.
IMO, things are different this time (as someone who has been in this industry for about 20 years now) and I don't see these jobs coming back. For one, many of these companies are now used to their tech teams being remote. The tools, culture, infra, etc. over the last ~5 years has all become remote which lessens the shock of going fully offshore. Two, many tech teams in the western world are already partially offshore…
AI isn't replacing jobs. AI spending is
521–530 of 580 posts
Re: AI isn't replacing jobs. AI spending is
#522Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's both. The devaluation of the dollar relative to other currencies will eventually make it profitable for work to move to the US. I think we're not seeing that yet because there's an imperfect coupling between asset price inflation, consumer price inflation, and exchange rates.
I think you might be confusing 'devaluation' with 'loss of spending power'. The dollar hasn't really lost value compared to other currencies. The thing that would do that would a loss of faith in the US to pay its debts, not the inability for the dollar to sustain a certain purchasing power.
The dollar is being devalued every time more money is injected into the system, either by government printing or banks printing more money via unsecured debt. When the total amount of currency in circulation goes up my money was devalued, prices will always go up when the money supply increases.
Re: AI isn't replacing jobs. AI spending is
#523Earlier quoted context omitted.
So, uh... how come you die younger?
Opioid epidemic skews the stats. The OP's point is why the wealthy in your country comes to the US for healthcare
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_total_hea...
Re: AI isn't replacing jobs. AI spending is
#524Why not both? Given all those articles with AI generated images I bet that some artists lost their jobs
I doubt. Good artists are still killing it. I see it on social media all the time. Also, corporations rarely care about the art as part of business. I don't remember the last time a tech company (or finance, wholesale, manufacturing, etc.) hired an artist. It is part of the job description of some managers, maybe, but who cares about someone with mediocre Photoshop skills?
Those jobs get killed.
Re: AI isn't replacing jobs. AI spending is
#525Re: AI isn't replacing jobs. AI spending is
#526Earlier quoted context omitted.
its kind of hard to imagine that FAANG employees in india and philippines get paid as much as the west when London is a 30-50% cut from the Bay Area. Just perusing on google for roles at google in hyderabad, I think its significantly lower than the US.
Talent eventually get paid their value. Doesn't matter where they live. If you have a brain, you rank up. Quickly.
It's more likely than you think.
Re: AI isn't replacing jobs. AI spending is
#527Earlier quoted context omitted.
Grandparent was referring to outsourcing, not H-1B hiring.
I am talking about bias in hiring in general. I am responding that the bias in hiring towards this one country goes beyond that it is 'cheap'. It is easy to make the 'cheap' argument when you talk about outsourcing but it no longer makes sense when you look at h1b numbers.
Same bias happened when manufacturing moved to China. However, no whining on HN since at the time, blue-collar American red-necks were getting their just deserts.
Re: AI isn't replacing jobs. AI spending is
#528Earlier quoted context omitted.
There’s quite a lot of arrogance about foreigners just not being good enough. Turns out smart people are everywhere.
Theres an equal amount of experience showing that the claims that cheap outsourced workers produce less output of lesser quality is true. Neither generalization works for ALL cases but hand wavey claims of some ism is small comfort to those of us who've seen the results more than once. And I've worked with excellent offshored workers as well, but that doesn't make claims to the contrary invalid.
Re: AI isn't replacing jobs. AI spending is
#529Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think you might be confusing 'devaluation' with 'loss of spending power'. The dollar hasn't really lost value compared to other currencies. The thing that would do that would a loss of faith in the US to pay its debts, not the inability for the dollar to sustain a certain purchasing power.
I don't particularly care about whether one currency is devalued relative to another. Sure that can matter, international trade is important today, but I care about whether my currency is being devalued relative to the products I actually buy day to day. The dollar is being devalued every time more money is injected into the system, either by government printing or banks printing more money via unsecured debt. When t…
I was pointing out somewhat pedantically that 'devalued' has a specific meaning and 'to lose purchasing power' is not it.
> When the total amount of currency in circulation goes up my money was devalued, prices will always go up when the money supply increases.
If you got more of that money to cover increased costs then it wouldn't be a problem, so it really only matters if you don't get a bump in income that covers the decrease in purchasing power.
The problem is not money supply increasing -- it is that it is being misallocated. The money supply has to increase in order for economies to grow otherwise it would deflate, and that cause all sorts of worse problems.
Re: AI isn't replacing jobs. AI spending is
#530Earlier quoted context omitted.
My reply was primarily about American new grads - who overwhelmingly don't do grad school. And your anecdote is exactly what I am trying to explain on HN. We as employers are fine paying high salaries to mid-career talent, but it's hard to justify hiring a middle of the pack new grad from CSU East Bay for a $130k base salary new grad role when I can hire a mid-career US returned FAANG dev in BLR or HYD for $70k-90k T…
> The brutal reality is, if you didn't attend a target CS program for your Bachelors (Stanford, Cal, MIT, UIUC, CMU, UT Austin, GT, UMich, UW, Cornell, Harvard, Columbia), at this point you probably aren't landing a high paying CS job But what about after masters? What are the expectations there? Now of course there is the research path which is publishing well in your masters, working at deepmind or nvidia etc,. But…
Not really especially when you factor in international tuition and loan servicing.
While it does depend on the program they attended, their past work experience in India, and their ability to land internships, in general I'd say salaries tend to be at the 25th percentile and below of what is shown on levels.fyi nationally.
But in all honestly, newly graduated masters students would be in the same boat as domestic undergrads if not worse becuase there isn't an incentive to hire an international student domestically and then go through the jumla of filing their H1B while they are on OPT unless they are a unicorn but if you are a unicorn, why would you even do a course based masters?!?
In fact, most of the complaints on HN about "H1Bs undercutting American salaries" tend to be these kinds of students because of how desperate they are to pay off a 1.5 to 2 crore loan with double digit interest rates despite having almost no scope of getting hired here in the US.
> for people who did not manage to get top 10% salaries here, the risk/reward is completely different
Yep.
Personal anecdote wise, I had a cousin who was working at Tech Mahindra in Chandigarh so on the lower end of salaries and got the US MS fuwara and they ended up attending UF (which is expensive and not a target).
We warned him not to come, but he didn't listen.
After spending almost $150k/1.5 crore getting the degree, the only SWE roles he could get could only pay $70k-80k in the NYC/NJ area which meant their take home after tax was rent was a little under $30k a year and this was during the 2022-24 period so no one wants to sponsor and he had a massive loan/EMI to pay off that was in the $17k-22k range a year.
He basically burnt through an extreme amount of family net worth (which was significant as they owned a house in Chandigarh) just to service a loan and basically remain in the same spot as before.
Another cousin did something similar to go to Canada despite us warning them not to do so either and their career is functionally screwed because it's even harder to find a role in Canada, but at least they attended a "college" so the tuition hit wasn't as severe.
In both cases it did not make financial sense for either to leave India for North America - their families had enough money in India that they could have bought significant property in Chandigarh and NCR and build generational wealth despite not necessarily working in the best jobs, but a lot of capital was basically burnt in loan repayment.
Like, let's be honest - the only people coming to the US to do a masters have a significant amount of capital because no one is going to guarantee a 2 crore loan without significant collateral, but at that point there are just better asset classes to diversify into.
From a financial standpoint, if you are Indian, it honestly isn't worth it doing some random coursework based masters in the US because in most cases you just aren't going to be hired by good companies anyhow, because none of us are willing to spend the capital to sponsor for an H1B after OPT unless you somehow ended up at a GAYMAN.