4 ms·

This is why I don't "freelance": it's filled with people who think spending 1 hour of unpaid work to get 1 hour of paid (and usually poorly paid, < $150/hr) wor

by sidlls 9y ago

This is why I don't "freelance": it's filled with people who think spending 1 hour of unpaid work to get 1 hour of paid (and usually poorly paid, < $150/hr) work is acceptable. I have no inclination to compete with essentially free labor. The only acceptable way to "freelance", in my opinion, is to start or join a consultancy and sell something. And then you're not really "freelancing" anymore, so much as running a business. Please note: I recognize that "not all freelancers" are like this. Generalizations aren't universal truisms, exceptions exist, and neither of those things is relevant to my comment.

ramshanker 9y ago
In many part of the world $10/hr sustainable is a dream opportunity. Government rate for unskilled workers is ~$1/hr over here.
- maxxxxx 9y ago
  Where is that?
  - ishanjain28 9y ago
    India. I charge $40/hour and people either ask me to charge a one time fee or reduce the price. Funny how people forget there are other places on earth where charging $150/hour would be nuts!
    - maxxxxx 9y ago
      That's seriously good money if you are not in one of the big cities, right?
      - ishanjain28 9y ago
        I am a student so $40/hour works great for me. I don't know if it's good money when you are paying for rent and other costs in a city.
        pulkitpahwa 9y ago
        It's good in any major city in India if you get regular work. Considering average Rs. 12 lpa as what a good software developer earns as full time (at least 50 hours/ week).
      - thisisit 9y ago
        That is good money even if he is in the cities, thanks for the conversion rates. But depends on the frequency of work too. That said, Congrats ishanjain28. I don't even get close to that :)
        EADGBE 9y ago
        Key is rate here. If they work for an hour a week, that amazing number really isn't that amazing anymore. If they can sustain such a workload over time for hopefully much more than an hour a week (keep in mind, it was 1 free hour per 1 paid hour, so $75/hr average), then yeah, pretty freaking amazing.
    - sidlls 9y ago
      I didn't forget. I simply am not competing with that worker. We aren't in the same labor market.
- deleted 9y ago
  [deleted]
3131s 9y ago
> This is why I don't "freelance": it's filled with people who think spending 1 hour of unpaid work to get 1 hour of paid (and usually poorly paid, < $150/hr) work is acceptable. I have no inclination to compete with essentially free labor. You sound really condescending. Less than 150$ is not "essentially free labor", and the people working for those amounts are not illogically choosing to do so. Even among developers it's a small fraction that can pull in the amount you are eluding to making. 150$ an hour works out to $312,000 yearly at 40 hours a week.
- sidlls 9y ago
  Yeah, and that's a bit more than what I cost my current employer all-inclusive on an annual basis, so it's about right given the additional tax burdens I'd have to take on to maintain my current income and benefits.
  - qaq 9y ago
    You do realize there are people living in places where cost of living is 1/10 of SV and even working for "free" they have N times higher disposable income than someone pulling in 300K+ in SV?
    - pc86 9y ago
      I would need $330k/yr in San Francisco, over $450k in Palo Alto to match my current standard of living. Probably a little more since my state/local taxes are a low double digit percentage of what they would be in California. Not to mention the fact I can get from my home to my office in 15 minutes during rush hour. Which in either of those two places mean I'd need to be within walking distance. Cue all the people saying it's "easy" or "just a matter of time" to get a $500k/yr job at Netflix or some garbage, but the truth is most software developers aren't going to work for any of the Big n companies, and will top out their comp around $125-175k cash and some RSUs that will be worthless 90% of the time. Even in Silicon Valley. So you get to make ~10% more in SV doing the same job you'd be doing in Minneapolis or Omaha or Pittsburgh or Charlotte or Reno for a cost of living that means you get to take home $500/mo in disposable income, sit in traffic for two hours each way, and pay one of the highest state tax rates in the country. I'd rather make slightly less and have a maxed out 401k, Roth, be making double payments on my mortgage (how many people in SF can even have a mortgage, let alone pay it off in ~12 years, without being millionaires?), and be able to drive from my home to my office in less time than it takes the 2009 Patriots to make 5 touchdowns.
jamesmp98 9y ago
Today I learned I'm paid so poorly it's time to revolt

by sidlls 9y ago

ramshanker 9y ago

In many part of the world $10/hr sustainable is a dream opportunity. Government rate for unskilled workers is ~$1/hr over here.

maxxxxx 9y ago
Where is that?
- ishanjain28 9y ago
  India. I charge $40/hour and people either ask me to charge a one time fee or reduce the price. Funny how people forget there are other places on earth where charging $150/hour would be nuts!
  - maxxxxx 9y ago
    That's seriously good money if you are not in one of the big cities, right?
    - ishanjain28 9y ago
      I am a student so $40/hour works great for me. I don't know if it's good money when you are paying for rent and other costs in a city.
      - pulkitpahwa 9y ago
        It's good in any major city in India if you get regular work. Considering average Rs. 12 lpa as what a good software developer earns as full time (at least 50 hours/ week).
    - thisisit 9y ago
      That is good money even if he is in the cities, thanks for the conversion rates. But depends on the frequency of work too. That said, Congrats ishanjain28. I don't even get close to that :)
      - EADGBE 9y ago
        Key is rate here. If they work for an hour a week, that amazing number really isn't that amazing anymore. If they can sustain such a workload over time for hopefully much more than an hour a week (keep in mind, it was 1 free hour per 1 paid hour, so $75/hr average), then yeah, pretty freaking amazing.
  - sidlls 9y ago
    I didn't forget. I simply am not competing with that worker. We aren't in the same labor market.
deleted 9y ago
[deleted]

3131s 9y ago

> This is why I don't "freelance": it's filled with people who think spending 1 hour of unpaid work to get 1 hour of paid (and usually poorly paid, < $150/hr) work is acceptable. I have no inclination to compete with essentially free labor. You sound really condescending. Less than 150$ is not "essentially free labor", and the people working for those amounts are not illogically choosing to do so. Even among developers it's a small fraction that can pull in the amount you are eluding to making. 150$ an hour works out to $312,000 yearly at 40 hours a week.

sidlls 9y ago
Yeah, and that's a bit more than what I cost my current employer all-inclusive on an annual basis, so it's about right given the additional tax burdens I'd have to take on to maintain my current income and benefits.
- qaq 9y ago
  You do realize there are people living in places where cost of living is 1/10 of SV and even working for "free" they have N times higher disposable income than someone pulling in 300K+ in SV?
  - pc86 9y ago
    I would need $330k/yr in San Francisco, over $450k in Palo Alto to match my current standard of living. Probably a little more since my state/local taxes are a low double digit percentage of what they would be in California. Not to mention the fact I can get from my home to my office in 15 minutes during rush hour. Which in either of those two places mean I'd need to be within walking distance. Cue all the people saying it's "easy" or "just a matter of time" to get a $500k/yr job at Netflix or some garbage, but the truth is most software developers aren't going to work for any of the Big n companies, and will top out their comp around $125-175k cash and some RSUs that will be worthless 90% of the time. Even in Silicon Valley. So you get to make ~10% more in SV doing the same job you'd be doing in Minneapolis or Omaha or Pittsburgh or Charlotte or Reno for a cost of living that means you get to take home $500/mo in disposable income, sit in traffic for two hours each way, and pay one of the highest state tax rates in the country. I'd rather make slightly less and have a maxed out 401k, Roth, be making double payments on my mortgage (how many people in SF can even have a mortgage, let alone pay it off in ~12 years, without being millionaires?), and be able to drive from my home to my office in less time than it takes the 2009 Patriots to make 5 touchdowns.

jamesmp98 9y ago

Today I learned I'm paid so poorly it's time to revolt