4 ms·

Everything in life is tradeoffs. American software engineers get paid more than basically anyone else in the world, but we also have less job security. What's p

Everything in life is tradeoffs. American software engineers get paid more than basically anyone else in the world, but we also have less job security. What's preferable just depends on your risk aversion vs marginal utility of money.

BaseballPhysics 4y ago
> American software engineers get paid more than basically anyone else in the world, but we also have less job security. What's preferable just depends on your risk aversion vs marginal utility of money. Of course, this comment is predicated on the assumption that America's loose labour laws are the reason for this salary disparity, and I'm not personally willing to follow you to that conclusion. I think it's far more likely that American software engineers get paid more because the industry was effectively born there, and it was born there due to historical accidents like the US being where the transistor was invented, the advancement of technology due to government spending during World War II and the subsequent space race, etc, not to mention the US being the center of the VC world, which has its own deep history.
- habitue 4y ago
  A tradeoff can exist without implying that the tradeoff is necessary. In other words, America has A but not B, Europe has B but not A, and there doesn't happen to be a place with both A and B, but it's not impossible in principle. Workers would still need to decide if they value A or B more, even if in a perfect world they could have both.
  - deleted 4y ago
    [deleted]
  - BaseballPhysics 4y ago
    Fair enough. I took the parent comment to be implying that that tradeoff was necessary--i.e. to have high salaries you have to have loose labour laws--as opposed to a simple statement about the current world we live in. If it's the latter, absolutely you are right, and it is certainly the case that tech employees today are forced to make the choice between New York/California tech salaries and strong labour laws, regardless of whether or not there's a necessary inverse relationship between those two things.
    - jdm2212 4y ago
      It is necessary. If you can fire low performers, average performance will be higher, which means average pay will be higher. The risk is that you personally get mistaken for (...or correctly assessed as...) a low performer. Hence, tradeoffs.
- type-r 4y ago
  interesting framing to use "historical accident" to describe the directed US gov funding that turned into today's tech sector.
lawn 4y ago
The rules are the same for less privileged workers, so what's preferable also depends on how good you already have it.
viraptor 4y ago
American software engineers * in unicorns from SV *. They have their own scale which is not really a national thing. Then you also have to adjust for the cost of living / not included insurances etc.
llbeansandrice 4y ago
Just because American SWEs are able to exploit the current workers paradigm in the US due to eye-watering amounts of money from VCs and the state of ad-tech doesn't mean jack shit for any at-will salaried employee that isn't paid in truck-loads of equity. There are states in the US where teacher's unions are out-lawed. US workers don't have rights. I have a feeling you might feel differently if not part of the segment of the working class that happens to be seeing benefits atm.
- kcplate 4y ago
  > There are states in the US where teacher's unions are out-lawed. That’s a bold statement. Care to back it up?
  - fn-mote 4y ago
    Hyperbole, but ... a quick look at the Wikipedia article on Wisconsin's 2011 law [1] looks like the next best thing (e.g., yearly votes to retain union). > Collective Bargaining: The law limits collective bargaining for most public employees to wages. Total wage increases cannot exceed a cap based on the consumer price index (CPI) unless approved by referendum. Increases from the bargaining process for teachers are applied only to the base wages, and do not include the additional salary of teachers. Contracts are limited to one year and wages frozen until the new contract is settled. Collective bargaining units must take annual votes to maintain certification as a union. Employers cannot collect union dues, and members of collective bargaining units are not required to pay them. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2011_Wisconsin_Act_10 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2011_Wisconsin_Act_10
  - DangitBobby 4y ago
    2nd link on Kagi search (first one says the same things): 1. https://www.businessinsider.com/states-where-teachers-unions-are-illegal-2011-2 https://www.businessinsider.com/states-where-teachers-unions...
    - kcplate 4y ago
      Outlawing collective bargaining might make unions less effective, but it doesn’t make unions illegal.
noirscape 4y ago
To offer a bit of counter-perspective, do keep in mind that while American SWEs do get paid more on the average, the costs of living in the US are also sky-high the areas where big software companies operate. Yes, in the EU I get paid a lot less, but the cost of living in Europe is also not nearly as expensive (although we also do pay more taxes). That's not even accounting for job security or workers rights, I seem to just have more money left over each month on average than any Americans I know of in the same industry because the cost of living is just lower and I have less heavy unexpected expenses (healthcare being the big one of course, but when I hear what US SWEs need to pay just to stay housed and fed, it makes absolutely no sense in prices compared to the EU). That's not a case of risk aversion, its a case of relative vs absolute pay. In relative pay, the EU pays their employees just straight up better. The US is only better in absolute pay, but that gets drained quickly due to the local economy scaling up to match.
- xur17 4y ago
  I would be really curious to see the numbers behind this.
- therealdrag0 4y ago
  Anytime you compare things anecdotally to people you know be verrry careful. It’s easy to not be comparing apples to apples. Do those people have kids? Rent vs own? How nice of cars? Commute? Sq footage of house? Etc etc. for example, I don’t work for FANG and you probably haven’t heard of my employer, but out of ~300k TC I save 48k cash + 100k stock + ~20k 401k retirement, which I think is pretty good. Tell me if you think I could do better in EU. . And while I live in suburbs of HCOL area, I’m fully remote so could move and save even more. Also remember if you own your house the money is usually not being drained it’s building into an equity nest egg. So at the end of the day the HCOL person will have more wealth even if they have to sell a house and move to use it; that arrow only goes one way (LCOL can’t sell and move to HCOL area and come out ahead).

BaseballPhysics 4y ago

> American software engineers get paid more than basically anyone else in the world, but we also have less job security. What's preferable just depends on your risk aversion vs marginal utility of money. Of course, this comment is predicated on the assumption that America's loose labour laws are the reason for this salary disparity, and I'm not personally willing to follow you to that conclusion. I think it's far more likely that American software engineers get paid more because the industry was effectively born there, and it was born there due to historical accidents like the US being where the transistor was invented, the advancement of technology due to government spending during World War II and the subsequent space race, etc, not to mention the US being the center of the VC world, which has its own deep history.

habitue 4y ago
A tradeoff can exist without implying that the tradeoff is necessary. In other words, America has A but not B, Europe has B but not A, and there doesn't happen to be a place with both A and B, but it's not impossible in principle. Workers would still need to decide if they value A or B more, even if in a perfect world they could have both.
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
- BaseballPhysics 4y ago
  Fair enough. I took the parent comment to be implying that that tradeoff was necessary--i.e. to have high salaries you have to have loose labour laws--as opposed to a simple statement about the current world we live in. If it's the latter, absolutely you are right, and it is certainly the case that tech employees today are forced to make the choice between New York/California tech salaries and strong labour laws, regardless of whether or not there's a necessary inverse relationship between those two things.
  - jdm2212 4y ago
    It is necessary. If you can fire low performers, average performance will be higher, which means average pay will be higher. The risk is that you personally get mistaken for (...or correctly assessed as...) a low performer. Hence, tradeoffs.
type-r 4y ago
interesting framing to use "historical accident" to describe the directed US gov funding that turned into today's tech sector.

lawn 4y ago

The rules are the same for less privileged workers, so what's preferable also depends on how good you already have it.

viraptor 4y ago

American software engineers * in unicorns from SV *. They have their own scale which is not really a national thing. Then you also have to adjust for the cost of living / not included insurances etc.

llbeansandrice 4y ago

Just because American SWEs are able to exploit the current workers paradigm in the US due to eye-watering amounts of money from VCs and the state of ad-tech doesn't mean jack shit for any at-will salaried employee that isn't paid in truck-loads of equity. There are states in the US where teacher's unions are out-lawed. US workers don't have rights. I have a feeling you might feel differently if not part of the segment of the working class that happens to be seeing benefits atm.

kcplate 4y ago
> There are states in the US where teacher's unions are out-lawed. That’s a bold statement. Care to back it up?
- fn-mote 4y ago
  Hyperbole, but ... a quick look at the Wikipedia article on Wisconsin's 2011 law [1] looks like the next best thing (e.g., yearly votes to retain union). > Collective Bargaining: The law limits collective bargaining for most public employees to wages. Total wage increases cannot exceed a cap based on the consumer price index (CPI) unless approved by referendum. Increases from the bargaining process for teachers are applied only to the base wages, and do not include the additional salary of teachers. Contracts are limited to one year and wages frozen until the new contract is settled. Collective bargaining units must take annual votes to maintain certification as a union. Employers cannot collect union dues, and members of collective bargaining units are not required to pay them. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2011_Wisconsin_Act_10 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2011_Wisconsin_Act_10
- DangitBobby 4y ago
  2nd link on Kagi search (first one says the same things): 1. https://www.businessinsider.com/states-where-teachers-unions-are-illegal-2011-2 https://www.businessinsider.com/states-where-teachers-unions...
  - kcplate 4y ago
    Outlawing collective bargaining might make unions less effective, but it doesn’t make unions illegal.

noirscape 4y ago

To offer a bit of counter-perspective, do keep in mind that while American SWEs do get paid more on the average, the costs of living in the US are also sky-high the areas where big software companies operate. Yes, in the EU I get paid a lot less, but the cost of living in Europe is also not nearly as expensive (although we also do pay more taxes). That's not even accounting for job security or workers rights, I seem to just have more money left over each month on average than any Americans I know of in the same industry because the cost of living is just lower and I have less heavy unexpected expenses (healthcare being the big one of course, but when I hear what US SWEs need to pay just to stay housed and fed, it makes absolutely no sense in prices compared to the EU). That's not a case of risk aversion, its a case of relative vs absolute pay. In relative pay, the EU pays their employees just straight up better. The US is only better in absolute pay, but that gets drained quickly due to the local economy scaling up to match.

xur17 4y ago
I would be really curious to see the numbers behind this.
therealdrag0 4y ago
Anytime you compare things anecdotally to people you know be verrry careful. It’s easy to not be comparing apples to apples. Do those people have kids? Rent vs own? How nice of cars? Commute? Sq footage of house? Etc etc. for example, I don’t work for FANG and you probably haven’t heard of my employer, but out of ~300k TC I save 48k cash + 100k stock + ~20k 401k retirement, which I think is pretty good. Tell me if you think I could do better in EU. . And while I live in suburbs of HCOL area, I’m fully remote so could move and save even more. Also remember if you own your house the money is usually not being drained it’s building into an equity nest egg. So at the end of the day the HCOL person will have more wealth even if they have to sell a house and move to use it; that arrow only goes one way (LCOL can’t sell and move to HCOL area and come out ahead).