4 ms·

Er. Yes, but in SV for example: - housing is literally 4x or 5x or even 10x the pricing elsewhere in the US. Rent is easily in that category too. - food, fu

Er. Yes, but in SV for example: - housing is literally 4x or 5x or even 10x the pricing elsewhere in the US. Rent is easily in that category too. - food, fuel for your car, electricity, and literally everything including haircuts is more expensive there. Often, several times more expensive. Pay = base needs + retirement savings + extra money for lifestyle/fun + bonus for skill set If base needs + retirement needs + lifestyle/fun costs go up/down, then of course pay will go up/down. Yes, 'skill set' remains static. Unless, of course, there is a surplus in one area (people not willing to move), and a shortage in another. In that case, yup.. guess what! That commodity becomes more valuable. I'm not sure why many people find all of the above confusing.

ornornor 6y ago
What I mean is that if a company can get its software made in SF where office rent and salaries are ridiculously high and still be profitable, it means that the product they make (software in that case) delivers tons of value. With that observation, whether the software is made in SF for one unit of cost or in a cheaper place for 1/4 unit of cost, the company sells it for the same amount and it’s profitable. Ergo, software produced anywhere yields the same amount of money to the company. So why should people get paid less no matter where they live if they produce the same output for the company? Isnt that unfair?
- bbarnett 6y ago
  No, not even slightly.
  - ornornor 6y ago
    Ok..? I’m not talking within the US where someone could move to the higher COL city and get paid more for the same output (if it made financial sense, after living expenses etc) but about people who can’t move countries because they’ll never get a visa for instance. How is it fair, then, that a SV engineer gets paid 200k to produce software, and her colleague in Turkey gets paid a tenth of that for the same output? It’s not because they’re producing less valuable code, the company sells the product for the same price to anyone anywhere. But the Turkish engineer is basically told by the company that because she’s stuck there and she can’t move elsewhere, then it’s normal to get paid a tenth of her SV colleague. How is that fair?
    - bbarnett 6y ago
      Discussing social imbalances, when referring to fiscal concerns of a company in a free-market economy, isn't logical. You're effectively complaining that capitalism isn't entirely fair. Yes? And? You're also saying "The US is wealthy, people are paid more there, that's not fair". Yes? What's you're point? Nothing is entirely fair. Other political and economic systems suck too. So? Don't conflate "companies paying by a logical, sensible, fair means under a free market economy" with "Turkey is a poorer country, due to social, cultural, historical issues, and therefore, someone 1/2 a world away should help. And not help my entire country, but just give me a few random people, software engineers, more wealth." If Turkish law, case history, employment law, market and economics was the same, then likely there would be more upward pressure on wages. In other words, the way to "fix" this, is to make Turkey a 100% clone of the US, along with all of its history, and most importantly, with the cultural outlook many have in the US. But I bet that isn't what a lot of people in Turkey want, is it?
      - ornornor 6y ago
        I wouldn’t know what Turkish people want, I’m not Turkish. To put it another way, you’re employing an individual to make you a thing you’ll sell for 1000$, you’re paying that person 10$ because you can get away with it since they live in a poorer country. If that same person was living in the US (for instance), you’d pay them 30$ if they lived somewhere cheap or 200$ if they lived in SV. Same individual, same skills, same output, same product. The only thing that changes is where that person lives which isn’t always a free choice because visas mostly. Framed differently, why is it fair to pay women less than men for the same job? We actually don’t think it’s fair judging from the lip service most companies pay to that issue and the laws written in a lot of countries. In that case, the personal circumstances that influence salary is sex, in what we were discussing before it’s where you live.
        bbarnett 6y ago
        The male/female discussion is a massive red herring, and a load of baloney. You cannot change your born sex, not when it comes to hiring discrimination. What we're talking about pay, relative to where you live. This is NOT discrimination, but market forces at work. I honestly can't even understand where you're coming from. You're essentially just asking for free money here. For people, shareholders, companies, foreign governments to hand over free money, for no other reason because you don't like how the economy works.
maccard 6y ago
> housing is literally 4x or 5x or even 10x the pricing elsewhere in the US. > Rent is easily in that category too. > Food, fuel for your car, electricity, and literally everything including haircuts is more expensive there It still doesn't matter. On a $200k salary in SF your post-tax income is $10667/month. If you spend $4k/month on rent (there are plenty of decent apartments and even houses if you commute a little at that price), $2000 on bills, food, your remaining salary of ~4500 usd is now still greater than a mid level engineers gross pay in the rest of the world, including most of europe.
- bbarnett 6y ago
  You're referring to imbalances in the equation, not to the premise.
ehnto 6y ago
> If base needs + retirement needs + lifestyle/fun costs go up/down, then of course pay will go up/down. It's a balance, the causation can flow the other way, and I'm pretty sure is currently doing so. The reason SF is so inflated is because (some) people can afford it. That's why locals get angry at tech companies, because the insane wages enabled by the tech bubble have driven the price of everything up, while everyone else's wages aren't catching up. If somehow you picked the bubble up and moved it away, there are no businesses in SF that could match the wages tech companies can, so fewer in SF could afford the inflated prices and they would drop back down to meet the wages that people are now getting. You can see the same thing happen when foreign housing investment is unregulated, and people with far more money than the community they're buying in purchase homes and push the market way up. People who live within the economic bounds of the community the houses are in can't afford it.

ornornor 6y ago

What I mean is that if a company can get its software made in SF where office rent and salaries are ridiculously high and still be profitable, it means that the product they make (software in that case) delivers tons of value. With that observation, whether the software is made in SF for one unit of cost or in a cheaper place for 1/4 unit of cost, the company sells it for the same amount and it’s profitable. Ergo, software produced anywhere yields the same amount of money to the company. So why should people get paid less no matter where they live if they produce the same output for the company? Isnt that unfair?

bbarnett 6y ago
No, not even slightly.
- ornornor 6y ago
  Ok..? I’m not talking within the US where someone could move to the higher COL city and get paid more for the same output (if it made financial sense, after living expenses etc) but about people who can’t move countries because they’ll never get a visa for instance. How is it fair, then, that a SV engineer gets paid 200k to produce software, and her colleague in Turkey gets paid a tenth of that for the same output? It’s not because they’re producing less valuable code, the company sells the product for the same price to anyone anywhere. But the Turkish engineer is basically told by the company that because she’s stuck there and she can’t move elsewhere, then it’s normal to get paid a tenth of her SV colleague. How is that fair?
  - bbarnett 6y ago
    Discussing social imbalances, when referring to fiscal concerns of a company in a free-market economy, isn't logical. You're effectively complaining that capitalism isn't entirely fair. Yes? And? You're also saying "The US is wealthy, people are paid more there, that's not fair". Yes? What's you're point? Nothing is entirely fair. Other political and economic systems suck too. So? Don't conflate "companies paying by a logical, sensible, fair means under a free market economy" with "Turkey is a poorer country, due to social, cultural, historical issues, and therefore, someone 1/2 a world away should help. And not help my entire country, but just give me a few random people, software engineers, more wealth." If Turkish law, case history, employment law, market and economics was the same, then likely there would be more upward pressure on wages. In other words, the way to "fix" this, is to make Turkey a 100% clone of the US, along with all of its history, and most importantly, with the cultural outlook many have in the US. But I bet that isn't what a lot of people in Turkey want, is it?
    - ornornor 6y ago
      I wouldn’t know what Turkish people want, I’m not Turkish. To put it another way, you’re employing an individual to make you a thing you’ll sell for 1000$, you’re paying that person 10$ because you can get away with it since they live in a poorer country. If that same person was living in the US (for instance), you’d pay them 30$ if they lived somewhere cheap or 200$ if they lived in SV. Same individual, same skills, same output, same product. The only thing that changes is where that person lives which isn’t always a free choice because visas mostly. Framed differently, why is it fair to pay women less than men for the same job? We actually don’t think it’s fair judging from the lip service most companies pay to that issue and the laws written in a lot of countries. In that case, the personal circumstances that influence salary is sex, in what we were discussing before it’s where you live.
      - bbarnett 6y ago
        The male/female discussion is a massive red herring, and a load of baloney. You cannot change your born sex, not when it comes to hiring discrimination. What we're talking about pay, relative to where you live. This is NOT discrimination, but market forces at work. I honestly can't even understand where you're coming from. You're essentially just asking for free money here. For people, shareholders, companies, foreign governments to hand over free money, for no other reason because you don't like how the economy works.

maccard 6y ago

> housing is literally 4x or 5x or even 10x the pricing elsewhere in the US. > Rent is easily in that category too. > Food, fuel for your car, electricity, and literally everything including haircuts is more expensive there It still doesn't matter. On a $200k salary in SF your post-tax income is $10667/month. If you spend $4k/month on rent (there are plenty of decent apartments and even houses if you commute a little at that price), $2000 on bills, food, your remaining salary of ~4500 usd is now still greater than a mid level engineers gross pay in the rest of the world, including most of europe.

bbarnett 6y ago
You're referring to imbalances in the equation, not to the premise.

ehnto 6y ago

> If base needs + retirement needs + lifestyle/fun costs go up/down, then of course pay will go up/down. It's a balance, the causation can flow the other way, and I'm pretty sure is currently doing so. The reason SF is so inflated is because (some) people can afford it. That's why locals get angry at tech companies, because the insane wages enabled by the tech bubble have driven the price of everything up, while everyone else's wages aren't catching up. If somehow you picked the bubble up and moved it away, there are no businesses in SF that could match the wages tech companies can, so fewer in SF could afford the inflated prices and they would drop back down to meet the wages that people are now getting. You can see the same thing happen when foreign housing investment is unregulated, and people with far more money than the community they're buying in purchase homes and push the market way up. People who live within the economic bounds of the community the houses are in can't afford it.