4 ms·
While I agree that there is dissonance between value produced and salary paid, but your argument doesn't seem to hold as well.If higher competition drives salar
by harshitaneja 6y ago
While I agree that there is dissonance between value produced and salary paid, but your argument doesn't seem to hold as well.If higher competition drives salaries upwards then the salaries should increase in a remote worker economy as worker pool is not bound to a geographical locality but rather to the whole planet(or at least a larger region if culture or timezone differences are major concerns).
Economics of demand and supply is much more complicated than we could reduce to a liner or so about competition or a few factors. Increased base living costs for the employees combined with the larger availability of capital with the employers probably plays a major role here.
- amscanne 6y agoThere are still very few companies that want to hire pure remote, so demand is low. This might all change: supply goes up as people go remote, demand goes up as companies look to hire remotely. It’s unclear what this market will look like, but I sincerely doubt it will mean higher compensation than the current Bay Area salaries. Cost of living has nothing to do with it. The density of employers (and capital) in the valley plus a desire to hire locally leads to high compensation. This leads to engineers moving to the valley. The high density of high earners and demand for housing is what is responsible for the high cost of living in the Bay Area, not the other way around (high costs of living leading to high compensation).