6 ms·

It seems like it would be more value efficient to train a person making 40k a year how to do that then pay someone hundreds of grand a year who already knows ho

It seems like it would be more value efficient to train a person making 40k a year how to do that then pay someone hundreds of grand a year who already knows how to do it.

lotsofpulp 5y ago
This information seems like it would be of interest to the board of directors at companies paying hundreds of thousands of dollars per year to employees. I assumed that they would have hired management that takes labor costs into account.
- nickthemagicman 5y ago
  in this post pandemic world, now that companies have set themselves up for remote work.... why would they hire someone in the US when they could hire someone cheaper in another country?
  - lotsofpulp 5y ago
    The point of my comment was to sarcastically point out there there are very qualified people sitting in decision making positions with an incentive to lower labor costs. It is possible they are making a mistake and completely missing a great money saving opportunity, but I would not bet on it. There very well could be new opportunities for labor arbitrage that can be taken advantage of by many businesses, and if so, it will be evidenced by the success of companies that take advantage of it. But it might take some time. But it is not a new idea, and is certainly one that has already been tried, and so if certain companies are not taking advantage of lower labor costs elsewhere, then it is prudent to assume there is a good reason.
    - nickthemagicman 5y ago
      My point is that the same people are also averse to risk. So now that covid essentially forced these companies to outfit and train their teams for remote and build a culture around remote work.. and they found it successful... Pandora's box may have finally been opened on outsourcing. We live in a different world than a few years ago. I hope I'm wrong because I'm benefiting from geographical effects and I have no delusions that I'm smarter than almost 6 billion people.
      - lotsofpulp 5y ago
        I can see that could be true, and communications technology and bandwidth has improved, so perhaps the situation has changed. I would expect it to take years to manifest though, maybe even a decade or more.
        nickthemagicman 5y ago
        Crossing my fingers!
foxyv 5y ago
The problem occurs when, after training that 40k a year developer, they BECOME a 100k a year developer. Unless you can lock them in with an amoral non-compete or some other form of illegal method, they will find out that they are worth that much and leave for someone who will pay them.
- nickthemagicman 5y ago
  In many countries a 40k a year developer IS a 100k a year developer in US.
xxs13 5y ago
I thought so too but unfortunately it would take someone making 100k a year somewhere between 6 and 12 months to teach someone making 40k to do the job properly. Then that someone would get a job offer making 100k and quit.

It seems like it would be more value efficient to train a person making 40k a year how to do that then pay someone hundreds of grand a year who already knows how to do it.

lotsofpulp 5y ago

This information seems like it would be of interest to the board of directors at companies paying hundreds of thousands of dollars per year to employees. I assumed that they would have hired management that takes labor costs into account.

nickthemagicman 5y ago
in this post pandemic world, now that companies have set themselves up for remote work.... why would they hire someone in the US when they could hire someone cheaper in another country?
- lotsofpulp 5y ago
  The point of my comment was to sarcastically point out there there are very qualified people sitting in decision making positions with an incentive to lower labor costs. It is possible they are making a mistake and completely missing a great money saving opportunity, but I would not bet on it. There very well could be new opportunities for labor arbitrage that can be taken advantage of by many businesses, and if so, it will be evidenced by the success of companies that take advantage of it. But it might take some time. But it is not a new idea, and is certainly one that has already been tried, and so if certain companies are not taking advantage of lower labor costs elsewhere, then it is prudent to assume there is a good reason.
  - nickthemagicman 5y ago
    My point is that the same people are also averse to risk. So now that covid essentially forced these companies to outfit and train their teams for remote and build a culture around remote work.. and they found it successful... Pandora's box may have finally been opened on outsourcing. We live in a different world than a few years ago. I hope I'm wrong because I'm benefiting from geographical effects and I have no delusions that I'm smarter than almost 6 billion people.
    - lotsofpulp 5y ago
      I can see that could be true, and communications technology and bandwidth has improved, so perhaps the situation has changed. I would expect it to take years to manifest though, maybe even a decade or more.
      - nickthemagicman 5y ago
        Crossing my fingers!

foxyv 5y ago

The problem occurs when, after training that 40k a year developer, they BECOME a 100k a year developer. Unless you can lock them in with an amoral non-compete or some other form of illegal method, they will find out that they are worth that much and leave for someone who will pay them.

nickthemagicman 5y ago
In many countries a 40k a year developer IS a 100k a year developer in US.

xxs13 5y ago

I thought so too but unfortunately it would take someone making 100k a year somewhere between 6 and 12 months to teach someone making 40k to do the job properly. Then that someone would get a job offer making 100k and quit.