3 ms·
200k in SF is...not a lot. At all.
by castlecrasher2 8y ago
200k in SF is...not a lot. At all.
- gowld 8y agoWhy does the CEO of Givewell need to live in SF?
- Viliam1234 8y agoThis is a question that should be taken seriously. I am not sure whether they did or did not. But I can imagine there could be valid reasons. For example, living close to potential major donors could increase the chance of convincing some of them to donate. But this too is a thing that should be measured.
- mercutio2 8y agoI get where you’re coming from, I think, but the way you phrased this I can’t agree with. 200k in SF is vastly less than a bunch of smart techies are making. But it is far, far more than the median SF income, and it is a very livable salary in the Bay Area. We should remember that even though SF is expensive, and tech employees can make much more than 200k, that much money is, in fact, after taxes, a lot of money. Even in SF. The spirit of what you’re saying is, I think, that talented people who have demonstrated organizational/management skills could easily make twice that much. I think that’s true, and I think the $200k salary is reasonable for the role in the organization.