6 ms·
This poll exemplifies the problem with all of these polls: it doesn't say what it's measuring. I would put in vastly different numbers for base salary vs base s
by cletus 15y ago
This poll exemplifies the problem with all of these polls: it doesn't say what it's measuring. I would put in vastly different numbers for base salary vs base salary + bonuses + shares + other benefits.
I see the same on Glassdoor on elsewhere. The bigger problem is the people volunteering such information have differing views on what to put making such information mostly useless.
Also, if life has taught me nothing else, people lie about their incomes, even anonymously.
- eliben 15y agoAgree totally. For instance, I could never figure out if these American polls take pension deductions into account. Where I live, the employer pays additional ~20% on top of base salary into various pension/saving funds, but since everyone gets it, it isn't taken into consideration when comparing salaries. I always wondered if seeing a quoted $100K salary in the US - does it include these pension payments or not.
- mattdeboard 15y agoWhat's a pension payment? :)
- Timothee 15y agoMy guess is that in general no, because for programmers, typically, there isn't any pension. However, there's something called 401k which is a type of retirement account. You can contribute to it through pre-tax contribution directly from your paycheck. It's fairly common for employers to match a certain amount to what employees contribute. Some might match 100%, some 5%, some up to a certain amount, some have some vesting period, etc. So that's one thing that is worth taking into account when comparing job offers, because if you plan on contributing $15k a year to your retirement account, if a company matches 100%, that more or less means an extra $15k a year. So some people might include that if asked of their overall benefits, some might not…
- OstiaAntica 15y agoFully 12.4% of nearly every American's income is going to Social Security, which is a national pension scheme. (er...national Ponzi scheme)
- rskar 15y agoA Ponzi scheme is a fraudulent investment operation that pays returns to its investors from their own money or the money paid by subsequent investors, rather than from any actual profit earned by the individual or organization running the operation. Social Security is a social insurance program that is primarily funded through dedicated payroll taxes called Federal Insurance Contributions Act tax (FICA). Tax deposits are formally entrusted to the Federal Old-Age and Survivors Insurance Trust Fund, the Federal Disability Insurance Trust Fund, the Federal Hospital Insurance Trust Fund, or the Federal Supplementary Medical Insurance Trust Fund. [above are copy/pastes from Wikipedia]
- natrius 15y agoIf you remove "fraudulent" from the definition of Ponzi scheme, it accurately describes Social Security. It's an unnecessarily inflammatory way to note that current beneficiaries are funded by new inductees, which is generally a problematic funding structure.
- stouset 15y agoPlease stop commenting on this topic until you have the slightest damn idea of what you're talking about. http://www.economist.com/blogs/democracyinamerica/2011/09/social-security-0 http://www.economist.com/blogs/democracyinamerica/2011/09/so...
- natrius 15y agoFirst of all, that article doesn't refute my point that Social Security is an "investment operation that pays returns to its investors from their own money or the money paid by subsequent investors." Secondly, the points the article does try to make are wrong, and the very first comment on it explains most of it. The article also suggests that things are just fine since the government can just raise taxes or reduce benefits to eliminate the problem, but doing so fundamentally breaks the promises that have been made to enrollees. You can fix the finances of any government program by paying less or charging more taxes, so it's kind of a silly argument. Social Security will probably exist forever, but its financial structure requires promises to be broken when population growth rates change (that is, when the rate of new inductees into the scheme slows). This is off topic; I'm done talking about it.
- gujk 15y agoSocial Security and friends in the US are approximately 7.5% deduction from an employees "advertised" income, plus about the same on top of (called the "employer's portion") that is not advertised as part of the salary. It is a bizarre format.
- OstiaAntica 15y agoSocial Security is 6.2% employer, 6.2% employee...but most economists would say that the employee pays both halves, since the cost is directly related to a specific person's job. (this year there's a temporary cut in the employee half as a stimulus measure) There's also a similar 50/50 Medicare payroll tax that totals 2.9% of each worker's salary. Total hit on most Americans for both programs is 15.3% of gross income. What's scary is that is nowhere near enough revenue to sustain either.
- Periodic 15y agoAs a self-employed person, I have to cover both halves. It's a bit of a shock when it's taken out on top of income tax.
- gujk 15y agoI apologize for commenting on a downvote, but what I wrote was a simple and accurate answer to parent's question, with only a mild bit of opinion at the end.
- baddox 15y agoI don't see it being that complicated. Just respond with your gross yearly pay, as seen on your paychecks. This works fine for anyone except perhaps co-founders are very early employees that don't receive a traditional paycheck.
- GFischer 15y agoI might have polluted the poll, but I didn't see it being US-only so I voted (less than 50k, "low" cost of living though some things are ridiculously expensive, it's not apples to apples). My gross pay is more than twice my take-home pay (and my paycheck is monthly, not biweekly), I know Europeans face the same (and on top of that, I pay 22% sales tax on everything and 60% to 100% import tax).
- endtime 15y agoI think that dilemma is probably far less significant for non-Googlers. ;)
- jshort 15y agoOne key aspect of statistics is randomly sampling, this poll has bias for sure. It is still interesting to see what HNers make with respect to where the live. It would also be interesting to see salary data compared to hours worked per week and self-employed or not.
- kellishaver 15y agoI agree. I put less than $50k, but I also only work part-time (by choice-the money I make is enough for my needs, so I'd rather have the free time than the extra cash), which doesn't really get factored in and just makes it seem like I work for really low pay.
- johnl 15y agoPlotted against years in business would give me a measure of where I am based upon my experience.