The boss who put everyone on 70K • Hacker News Board

Re: The boss who put everyone on 70K

#51

Post by draugadrotten » Fri, Feb 28, 2020, 8:50 AM UTC

eru wrote: post #41

WalterBright wrote: post #34

Since it's working for Dan and his company, great! > in Seattle that wasn't enough to afford a decent home. Because the population in Seattle has grown by leaps and bounds, if everyone could afford one of the supply of homes, the prices would go up until demand equals supply.

Well, they could also build more homes. But Seattle has somehow decided they don't want that.

when building homes, you also need to build roads, sewers, power plants, hospitals, schools... it's not just about a few houses.

Re: The boss who put everyone on 70K

#52

Post by jshevek » Fri, Feb 28, 2020, 8:58 AM UTC

DyslexicAtheist wrote: post #49

eru wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Btw, I think Google could already either pay 70k+ to every employee or is pretty close. They just need to make sure that all the janitors and baristas are employed by subcontractors.

what would a barista or janitor get paid at Google today? I always thought that they did use subcontractors for these roles? I must misunderstand, are you implying that employment via a subcontractor would increase their salary?

> I must misunderstand, are you implying that employment via a subcontractor would increase their salary?

Subcontracted workers are technically not employees of Google, therefore can be disregarded when making claims about the min salary of employees.

Re: The boss who put everyone on 70K

#53

Post by grouchoboy » Fri, Feb 28, 2020, 9:01 AM UTC

DyslexicAtheist wrote: post #49

eru wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Btw, I think Google could already either pay 70k+ to every employee or is pretty close. They just need to make sure that all the janitors and baristas are employed by subcontractors.

what would a barista or janitor get paid at Google today? I always thought that they did use subcontractors for these roles? I must misunderstand, are you implying that employment via a subcontractor would increase their salary?

I understand that if the low salary workers are employed via a subcontractor, that workers salary is irrelevant for the average salary you are paying.

Re: The boss who put everyone on 70K

#54

Post by atlasunshrugged » Fri, Feb 28, 2020, 9:20 AM UTC

numlock86 wrote: post #45

Oh, that story. I remember it. A lot of the high-performers left shortly after that. It was all triggered by some lawsuit in the first place anyway. The "give everyone the same salary" was like a compromise to weaken the lawsuit while at the same time to make a positive impact on media.

Yeah, I'm really surprised more people aren't bringing up the lawsuit aspect of it (and the accusations of domestic abuse) while saying he's a 'nice guy.'

https://www.bloomberg.com/features/2015-gravity-ceo-dan-pric.... https://www.hundredeightydegrees.com/investigation/2018/2/27....

Re: The boss who put everyone on 70K

#55

Post by clarry » Fri, Feb 28, 2020, 9:27 AM UTC

draugadrotten wrote: post #51

eru wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well, they could also build more homes. But Seattle has somehow decided they don't want that.

when building homes, you also need to build roads, sewers, power plants, hospitals, schools... it's not just about a few houses.

You always needed those. So why is it that you could build the first homes and roads and sewers and power plants and hospitals and schools, but not more of the same?

Re: The boss who put everyone on 70K

#56

Post by smitty1e » Fri, Feb 28, 2020, 9:28 AM UTC

It's an excellent story.

But what works in a group smaller than Dunbar's Number[1] may not quite scale up.

Don't let that Politician Obfuscating Near You (PONY) con you into believing otherwise.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunbar's_number

Re: The boss who put everyone on 70K

#57

Post by 1123581321 » Fri, Feb 28, 2020, 9:30 AM UTC

TomMckenny wrote: post #20

eru wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Where do you get that 'middle-class income' from? The standard of living that 70k USD buys today is vastly better than what the median income bought in 1950. (Of course, Seattle is rather expensive. The 70k USD would go much further in a city that didn't restrict residential construction so much.)

You can not even buy a house built on the 1950s on 70k a year. And while most quality claims (which usually lack actual numbers) certainly look subjective, the quality of a dirt lot or vial of insulin has obviously not changed while their adjusted inflation price has sky rocketed. At any rate, the claim that "stuff" is more expensive because it is better implies that decades of technical improvements have resulted in…

Insulin quality and delivery methods have repeatedly improved.

Re: The boss who put everyone on 70K

#58

Post by rntksi » Fri, Feb 28, 2020, 9:34 AM UTC

atlasunshrugged wrote: post #54

numlock86 wrote: post #45

Oh, that story. I remember it. A lot of the high-performers left shortly after that. It was all triggered by some lawsuit in the first place anyway. The "give everyone the same salary" was like a compromise to weaken the lawsuit while at the same time to make a positive impact on media.

Yeah, I'm really surprised more people aren't bringing up the lawsuit aspect of it (and the accusations of domestic abuse) while saying he's a 'nice guy.' https://www.bloomberg.com/features/2015-gravity-ceo-dan-pric... . https://www.hundredeightydegrees.com/investigation/2018/2/27... .

Here's the correct link (yours has ... in it):

https://www.bloomberg.com/features/2015-gravity-ceo-dan-pric...

Re: The boss who put everyone on 70K

#59

Post by maxerickson » Fri, Feb 28, 2020, 9:39 AM UTC

TomMckenny wrote: post #20

eru wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Where do you get that 'middle-class income' from? The standard of living that 70k USD buys today is vastly better than what the median income bought in 1950. (Of course, Seattle is rather expensive. The 70k USD would go much further in a city that didn't restrict residential construction so much.)

You can not even buy a house built on the 1950s on 70k a year. And while most quality claims (which usually lack actual numbers) certainly look subjective, the quality of a dirt lot or vial of insulin has obviously not changed while their adjusted inflation price has sky rocketed. At any rate, the claim that "stuff" is more expensive because it is better implies that decades of technical improvements have resulted in…

The quality of insulin went up a great deal ~1980 when human insulin produced in bacteria came to market. That's the stuff you can get at Walmart for $25 a vial. Prior to that, the source of insulin had been the bovines.

The more expensive insulins that are on the market have different effect profiles that (somewhat) simplify managing blood sugar.

Re: The boss who put everyone on 70K

#60

Post by atlasunshrugged » Fri, Feb 28, 2020, 9:41 AM UTC

rntksi wrote: post #58

atlasunshrugged wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah, I'm really surprised more people aren't bringing up the lawsuit aspect of it (and the accusations of domestic abuse) while saying he's a 'nice guy.' https://www.bloomberg.com/features/2015-gravity-ceo-dan-pric... . https://www.hundredeightydegrees.com/investigation/2018/2/27... .

Here's the correct link (yours has ... in it): https://www.bloomberg.com/features/2015-gravity-ceo-dan-pric...

Thanks!