> If there is a glut of "low-level" engineers it's impossible for there to be a shortage of high-end mid-level engineers as those mid-level come from the low-en

> If there is a glut of "low-level" engineers it's impossible for there to be a shortage of high-end mid-level engineers as those mid-level come from the low-end engineers. That is a faulty assumption that cannot be true if in conflict with a bias. For example what is your data driven definition for a high-end versus low-end engineer? The answer to that question is almost certainly subjective. In my experience employers optimize for hiring and onboarding first. Everything else is a secondary consideration that impacts tools, delivery, quality, and so forth. Employers could optimize for faster delivery and higher quality code, but that would mean fewer frameworks and abstraction layers which harms speed of hiring and speed of project onboarding. From a purely numbers perspective that is absurd. Hiring and onboarding are one time problems per employee and are prioritized over concerns which cost the company significantly for the life of that employment. It isn’t about numbers. This isn’t about numbers explains the high pay rates for developers. It’s about having employed developers already available.