3 ms·

I think there are a number of caveats to this article: 1. The amount that a company can sustainably pay you is dependent on how much value your efforts have in

by ttcbj 8y ago

I think there are a number of caveats to this article: 1. The amount that a company can sustainably pay you is dependent on how much value your efforts have in its industry. Software has significantly higher margins than medicine, law, or almost anything else. As long as those margins are sustained, it is possible to pay high salaries. (As buffet says: I'd rather work for a mediocre company in a great industry than a great company in a mediocre industry). 2. But companies don't want to pay high salaries, so they will look for substitutes. Substitutes could be technology (RDS instead of DBAs) or increased supply of quality programmers. So far, it seems like these big companies haven't been able to find good enough substitutes to force down wages. 3. If you are looking at FAANG salaries, you are looking at the top of the income spectrum. The top of the income spectrum for lawyers and doctors is quite high. 4. Market economies reward value (outcomes) not merit (hard work). Hard work is correlated with outcomes, but it is not always a perfect correlation. So, looking at programming and saying it is less 'hard' than law or medicine doesn't say much, the question is how much value the person can generate, and how much of it the company can capture.

stunt 8y ago
And also, Do not forget that only a small percentage of developers are making those numbers. And that is quite normal since those companies are in the Fortune 500 most valuable companies in the world! Comparing that percentage, you would see the same pattern in every other industry. If you do something uncommonly good, you make more than everyone else in the industry. Same applies to all other skills that are mentioned in the article. If you pick the top earners in law, medicine, etc, you will easily find higher numbers.
Consultant32452 8y ago
#4 is a lesson I'm still struggling with in spite of nearly a decade in "leadership" roles. I've been discouraged from coding beyond tiny situationally dependent snippets to teach a more junior programmer something. My value is no longer in producing things directly, my value is in being the guy on the conference call where the customer says "If Consultant32454 says it will work, it will work.". I understand this is valuable, but not having a "thing" I built with my own hands at the end of the day is difficult for me. I wonder if this is a result of low class upbringing or something... Plenty of people in the management/executive class seem to be able to accept credit/responsibility for things they managed into existence rather than produced into existence... It's hard to accept being a force multiplier rather than a force, if that makes sense.

by ttcbj 8y ago

stunt 8y ago

And also, Do not forget that only a small percentage of developers are making those numbers. And that is quite normal since those companies are in the Fortune 500 most valuable companies in the world! Comparing that percentage, you would see the same pattern in every other industry. If you do something uncommonly good, you make more than everyone else in the industry. Same applies to all other skills that are mentioned in the article. If you pick the top earners in law, medicine, etc, you will easily find higher numbers.

Consultant32452 8y ago

#4 is a lesson I'm still struggling with in spite of nearly a decade in "leadership" roles. I've been discouraged from coding beyond tiny situationally dependent snippets to teach a more junior programmer something. My value is no longer in producing things directly, my value is in being the guy on the conference call where the customer says "If Consultant32454 says it will work, it will work.". I understand this is valuable, but not having a "thing" I built with my own hands at the end of the day is difficult for me. I wonder if this is a result of low class upbringing or something... Plenty of people in the management/executive class seem to be able to accept credit/responsibility for things they managed into existence rather than produced into existence... It's hard to accept being a force multiplier rather than a force, if that makes sense.