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

The boss who put everyone on 70K

bbc.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

301–310 of 381 posts

Re: The boss who put everyone on 70K

#301

Post by ivankolev »

TimPC wrote: post #233
ivankolev wrote: post #206

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I came in TO in the middle oughts and there were patches of the city still having that artsy, edgy and unkempt vibe, and even the commercial Yonge strip from Bloor down to Queen was atmospheric. All got lost to the glass condo towers, and the faux hipster hoods are souless and uninteresting. I feel Toronto became a victim of its own success, great economic progress does not equal vibrant and livable city!

As a resident of Toronto I feel less bad about the visual display of the city and worse about the outflux of artistic talent. So many artists I knew a decade ago are living far out in the burbs, where it is harder to find events and develop talent. There are new artists but the artistic communities are becoming a mix of young people and people with corporate jobs. Very few people pursuing their craft full time are ma…

Case in point, close to where my humble abode is, there is a newly built artscape center, a supposed hub of a condo tower with spaces for installations and happenings. Well, since it is a newly built unit, it falls outside of rental control bylaws, thanks to the boneheaded legislature introduced by the wrecking ball that is Doug Ford, and the rents there promptly went up 20% or so at the end of the initial one year leases, so all the struggling artists that this artscape hub was supposed to provide home to, started leaving in droves.

Re: The boss who put everyone on 70K

#302

Post by Seenso »

shkkmo wrote: post #171
telesilla wrote: post #111

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Alfred Nobel started the prize because his obituary was accidentally published, putting him in a bad light and he wanted to be remembered differently - we benefit from this prize today, in spite of his destructive business activities. I think it's fair to mention the fact that it was due to Price being accused of overpaying himself that the situation got turned around to be something valuable for his company and staf…

> However, I don't think it's fair to vilify him in the present day and discredit the results. I'm with you for the second part, I think the results can be looked at independently. However, I don't think one good deed should excuse past bad behavior and one should be careful about glorifying someone to the extent that we ignore their misdeeds.

> However, I don't think one good deed should excuse past bad behavior and one should be careful about glorifying someone to the extent that we ignore their misdeeds.

I disagree. What you say is true in a lot of cases [1], but you're devaluing personal growth way too much. This guy's "one good deed" was a drastic and radical break with his misdeed of overpaying himself. He deserves all the glory he can get for that.

[1] For instance: a businessman who spent his life exploiting thousands to make himself rich, who then engages in some half-ass charity at the end of his life.

Re: The boss who put everyone on 70K

#303

Post by Apocryphon »

skookum wrote: post #300
Apocryphon wrote: post #284

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Amazon/Microsoft TC, probably. Base salary is a different story.

I don't know why there is always this nitpick. I just take it for granted that when someone talks about tech "salaries" they mean "total comp". Virtually everyone in my peer group makes more than half of their total comp from non-salary compensation. Sure that portion varies somewhat due to market forces, but there seems little point in discussing base salaries.

There's a huge difference from getting stock grants from FAANGM and getting options from startups, which may easily turn into funny money. The recent underwhelming tech IPOs from Uber, and perhaps worrying upcoming IPOs from AirBnB, indicate that even options from unicorns might be of debatable worth. It's just not money in the bank in the same way those from the tech giants are.

Re: The boss who put everyone on 70K

#304

Post by irrational »

r00fus wrote: post #288
irrational wrote: post #285

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have a sister-in-law that I recently learned is making $275k in a tech job in Seattle. She has no college degree or formal training. She has just learned things on the job over the years. I was frankly astonished. That is more than double what I make as a senior software engineer 3 hours away in Portland.

What job / company (or industry if you can't say)?

Something to do with cloud computing, but not for any of the FANG + Microsoft companies.

Re: The boss who put everyone on 70K

#305

Post by brailsafe »

irrational wrote: post #285
alexbanks wrote: post #276

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm curious where this poster got that figure. I haven't found anything like it, in fact a pretty consistent 145k average salary. I would also be wary of average vs. median, as there's some real crazy outliers out there.

I have a sister-in-law that I recently learned is making $275k in a tech job in Seattle. She has no college degree or formal training. She has just learned things on the job over the years. I was frankly astonished. That is more than double what I make as a senior software engineer 3 hours away in Portland.

As a software dev just to the north in Vancouver, BC at 110k CAD: that's bananas money.

Re: The boss who put everyone on 70K

#306

Post by NikolaeVarius »

irrational wrote: post #304
r00fus wrote: post #288

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What job / company (or industry if you can't say)?

Something to do with cloud computing, but not for any of the FANG + Microsoft companies.

Well FAANG seems to be missing an A, and a certain company does cloud computing starting with an A

Re: The boss who put everyone on 70K

#307

Post by [deleted] »

627467 wrote: post #107

There have been several CEOS who historically have paid themselves 1usd or very low salaries. They end up making up the difference in other parts of their comp packages. I suppose this boss is also the main shareholder so he benefits from productivity increase.

[deleted]

Re: The boss who put everyone on 70K

#308

Post by flush »

627467 wrote: post #107

There have been several CEOS who historically have paid themselves 1usd or very low salaries. They end up making up the difference in other parts of their comp packages. I suppose this boss is also the main shareholder so he benefits from productivity increase.

>He realised that he would not only have to slash his salary, but also mortgage his two houses and give up his stocks and savings.

Not sure if this means ALL of his stock, but this doesn't seem to be the same thing.

Re: The boss who put everyone on 70K

#309

Post by rustybolt »

irrational wrote: post #285
alexbanks wrote: post #276

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm curious where this poster got that figure. I haven't found anything like it, in fact a pretty consistent 145k average salary. I would also be wary of average vs. median, as there's some real crazy outliers out there.

I have a sister-in-law that I recently learned is making $275k in a tech job in Seattle. She has no college degree or formal training. She has just learned things on the job over the years. I was frankly astonished. That is more than double what I make as a senior software engineer 3 hours away in Portland.

And seven times as much as I make working as a compiler engineer with a double BSc and MSc in STEM. Salaries do vary a lot with location.

Re: The boss who put everyone on 70K

#310

Post by philipkglass »

pritovido wrote: post #73
angarg12 wrote: post #47

> "When money is not at the forefront of your mind when you're doing your job, it allows you to be more passionate about what motivates you," she says. I spent the first several years of my career working in academia for a poverty level wage. I can confirm from my own experience that when you worry about not being able to pay rent and all the bills, it's very difficult to be productive, much less in a job that requir…

That is a consequence of procrastination, which is the consequence of anxiety, which is the consequence of barely meeting ends. Basically in order to be productive under those circumstances you have to ignore reality, which can be problematic for the people around you. But at the same time everything is relative on your perception of reality. We spend today 50-100 times more energy per person that people 100 years ag…

In 1920, the United States consumed 21.3 quadrillion BTU of primary energy. The population at the time was 106 million.

https://www.eia.gov/totalenergy/data/annual/showtext.php?t=p...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1920_United_States_Census

In 2018 the United States consumed 101.2 quadrillion BTU of primary energy, with a population of 327 million.

https://flowcharts.llnl.gov/content/assets/images/charts/Ene...

https://www.worldometers.info/world-population/us-population...

Primary energy consumption per capita in the United States increased about 54% in the last 100 years, not 5000%.

Global energy consumption per capita has grown by nearly 300% since 1920:

http://theoildrum.com/files/per-capita-world-energy-by-sourc...

This is still much less than 5000%.

Post reply on HN