58 ms·

To answer the question - unbiased Salary data, making union negotiations and expectations of new grads grounded in reality, unlike the reporting bias of levels

To answer the question - unbiased Salary data, making union negotiations and expectations of new grads grounded in reality, unlike the reporting bias of levels, Glassdoor etc. This is why management hates people sharing salary info - making it easier for new founders to budget their talent costs - directly answering something you said, Making it easier to push back against recruiters (market average is this, I'm at least average, fuck you pay me) - easier time spotting tax evasion (which some might see as a downside) - exposing inequality in society in undeniable fashion, giving teeth to any arguements about them. Similarly for arguements about which data shouldn't be collected, which incentives are working or not... The bandits/corruption thing I can't argue with, but that's a deeper and different problem than public taxes in Norway or Germany. Same for gold diggers and money bags

caskstrength 5y ago
> unbiased Salary data, making union negotiations and expectations of new grads grounded in reality, unlike the reporting bias of levels, Glassdoor etc. This is why management hates people sharing salary info - making it easier for new founders to budget their talent costs You can have some stats or non-PI info published on this. Or force companies to publish how much they are paying to existing employees with same title, like they starting to do in several US states. No need for nosy neighbor or potential romantic interest to have access to my income. > Making it easier to push back against recruiters (market average is this, I'm at least average, fuck you pay me) Or you might be below average like significant amount of people who I have interviewed and who can't reverse a string? Anyway, everyone can't get "at least average" salary, that is not how average works (note for pedants: unless everyone earns exactly the same, of course). > easier time spotting tax evasion What does it have to do with tax evasion? IRS already has this data. If you are worried about politicians and government employees and want visibility into their earnings (which is reasonable), you can make only their data public, which is already implemented as a law in my country. Again, no need for a random Tinder date to have this data. > exposing inequality in society in undeniable fashion, giving teeth to any arguements about them I won't argue with your leftist agenda, but again, you can just publish stats (e.g. senior software engineer average in location X is Y) without letting my extended family know how much I make. > The bandits/corruption thing I can't argue with, but that's a deeper and different problem than public taxes in Norway or Germany. Same for gold diggers and money bags Well, maybe let's not enable these people then? Especially since there are multiple other options that I presented previously.
- igorkraw 5y ago
  Publishing stats would be a good start yeah. If you can justify paying less, it's negotiation time right? This just sets the starting point. The rest I won't address because it's a boring argument to have where you call me leftist because you disagree politically instead of discussing in good faith
  - caskstrength 5y ago
    You still didn't present any arguments why you need to know specifically my income and not just aggregated data (that can be arbitrary fine-grained like per-company or even per-grade per-company), which makes it very hard for me not to consider whole discussion to be primary ideologically-motivated from your side. BTW I assume we are both not from US, so I don't understand why you are acting offended after being called leftist as a reply to explicitly leftist statement ("exposing inequality in society in undeniable fashion...").
    - igorkraw 5y ago
      I'm open to doing those arbitrarily fine grained stats as a workable compromise, but the ability to have journalists or citizens check for inconsistencies in tax reports or use the raw data for other research seems positive for me, as well as the ability to ask my boss why I'm being paid less than my coworker who does less than me. You might disagree whether it's worth it, but they are 2 positives already (maybe 1 if you are hard against citizen law enforcement) The second part: it's boring because we can have a discussion about which mechanisms are beneficial for society without defaulting to political shortcuts or assuming an argument can only come from a worldview (maybe I'm a weird type of market libertarian who believes in perfect information symmetry?). You can argue that exposing inequalities doesn't have inherent value because inequalities are good actually Yadda Yadda Yadda and we can actually exchange our views on how and why we disagree...or you can default to the label. Yes we'd be rehashing a bunch, but it would be a good faith discussion. Edit:@Caskstrength, I can't reply to you, but I would like to highlight my first sentence in the first paragraph. Otherwise, thanks for engaging

caskstrength 5y ago

> unbiased Salary data, making union negotiations and expectations of new grads grounded in reality, unlike the reporting bias of levels, Glassdoor etc. This is why management hates people sharing salary info - making it easier for new founders to budget their talent costs You can have some stats or non-PI info published on this. Or force companies to publish how much they are paying to existing employees with same title, like they starting to do in several US states. No need for nosy neighbor or potential romantic interest to have access to my income. > Making it easier to push back against recruiters (market average is this, I'm at least average, fuck you pay me) Or you might be below average like significant amount of people who I have interviewed and who can't reverse a string? Anyway, everyone can't get "at least average" salary, that is not how average works (note for pedants: unless everyone earns exactly the same, of course). > easier time spotting tax evasion What does it have to do with tax evasion? IRS already has this data. If you are worried about politicians and government employees and want visibility into their earnings (which is reasonable), you can make only their data public, which is already implemented as a law in my country. Again, no need for a random Tinder date to have this data. > exposing inequality in society in undeniable fashion, giving teeth to any arguements about them I won't argue with your leftist agenda, but again, you can just publish stats (e.g. senior software engineer average in location X is Y) without letting my extended family know how much I make. > The bandits/corruption thing I can't argue with, but that's a deeper and different problem than public taxes in Norway or Germany. Same for gold diggers and money bags Well, maybe let's not enable these people then? Especially since there are multiple other options that I presented previously.

igorkraw 5y ago
Publishing stats would be a good start yeah. If you can justify paying less, it's negotiation time right? This just sets the starting point. The rest I won't address because it's a boring argument to have where you call me leftist because you disagree politically instead of discussing in good faith
- caskstrength 5y ago
  You still didn't present any arguments why you need to know specifically my income and not just aggregated data (that can be arbitrary fine-grained like per-company or even per-grade per-company), which makes it very hard for me not to consider whole discussion to be primary ideologically-motivated from your side. BTW I assume we are both not from US, so I don't understand why you are acting offended after being called leftist as a reply to explicitly leftist statement ("exposing inequality in society in undeniable fashion...").
  - igorkraw 5y ago
    I'm open to doing those arbitrarily fine grained stats as a workable compromise, but the ability to have journalists or citizens check for inconsistencies in tax reports or use the raw data for other research seems positive for me, as well as the ability to ask my boss why I'm being paid less than my coworker who does less than me. You might disagree whether it's worth it, but they are 2 positives already (maybe 1 if you are hard against citizen law enforcement) The second part: it's boring because we can have a discussion about which mechanisms are beneficial for society without defaulting to political shortcuts or assuming an argument can only come from a worldview (maybe I'm a weird type of market libertarian who believes in perfect information symmetry?). You can argue that exposing inequalities doesn't have inherent value because inequalities are good actually Yadda Yadda Yadda and we can actually exchange our views on how and why we disagree...or you can default to the label. Yes we'd be rehashing a bunch, but it would be a good faith discussion. Edit:@Caskstrength, I can't reply to you, but I would like to highlight my first sentence in the first paragraph. Otherwise, thanks for engaging