3 ms·

The "solution" to this "problem" is very simple. Give exceptional engineers exceptional compensation outside of Wall St. and things will level out. I would enj

The "solution" to this "problem" is very simple. Give exceptional engineers exceptional compensation outside of Wall St. and things will level out. I would enjoy working outside of Wall St., but you're going to have to pay me to get me to leave.

ThomPete 15y ago
But this is the problem. Most other industries do not operate with profits that allow for Wall St. salaries.
- msellout 15y ago
  And much of the reason for those low profits is the high levels of debt that non-financial corporations take on. Or in another way of analyzing the corporate world, if you track who owns the shares, you will find that almost everything is owned by a few large banks [1]. So in a sense, banking is the only activity that is profitable. This follows naturally from the structure of the economy -- capitalism [2]. [1] "The network of global corporate control" Vitali, Glattfelder, Battiston. http://arxiv.org/PS_cache/arxiv/pdf/1107/1107.5728v2.pdf http://arxiv.org/PS_cache/arxiv/pdf/1107/1107.5728v2.pdf [2] Every Economics 101 textbook ever written.
  - FD3SA 15y ago
    Unfortunately, as you've alluded to in your post, capitalism is a winner take all game of poker that never ends. This means that those with capital have disproportionate leverage over other players, to such a degree that skill and chance become almost negligible. To have any chance of becoming a force in the game, you have to accrue massive capital by going all in with every hand you are dealt and every chip you have; i.e. the startup philosophy. However, this does not stop the trend of capital consolidation in the hands of fewer and fewer players. Conversely, the rapid advancement of technology allows even more leverage for skilled and/or lucky and/or wealthy players to exert their influence over the market. Capitalism will not be logical once a trillionaire emerges with enough purchasing power to decide the fate of the entire economic market. By definition, the current capitalistic model of economics is transient, and will not reach steady state. Once the system has crashed beyond repair, I pray that intelligent engineers can construct a new system which better allocates the world's resources to its many needs.
    - eligottlieb 15y ago
      One of the few things that actually stands to make a difference in this zone is the possible implementation of crowdfunding laws. If small, new businesses like start-ups could actually raise investment through crowdfunding (ie: through people who don't have the 1%-er status to qualify as accredited investors), it would be possible to use capital sources not already controlled by the existing players.
  - gaius 15y ago
    That is disingenuous - what looks like shares owned by Bank X is really the mutual funds of a million ordinary citizens, administered on their behalf by Bank X.
- codeonfire 15y ago
  Cut out one layer of middlemen do-nothings trying to deliver the product of the rank and file as their own effort and any industry could easily afford it.
- gaius 15y ago
  Apple earned $400000 in profit per employee last year, more than Goldman Sachs [1] [1] http://articles.businessinsider.com/2012-01-23/tech/30654463_1_apple-exxon-mobil-iphones http://articles.businessinsider.com/2012-01-23/tech/30654463...
deleted 15y ago
[deleted]
olalonde 15y ago
The problem is that outside of finance, it's very difficult to measure a programmer's productivity.

ThomPete 15y ago

But this is the problem. Most other industries do not operate with profits that allow for Wall St. salaries.

msellout 15y ago
And much of the reason for those low profits is the high levels of debt that non-financial corporations take on. Or in another way of analyzing the corporate world, if you track who owns the shares, you will find that almost everything is owned by a few large banks [1]. So in a sense, banking is the only activity that is profitable. This follows naturally from the structure of the economy -- capitalism [2]. [1] "The network of global corporate control" Vitali, Glattfelder, Battiston. http://arxiv.org/PS_cache/arxiv/pdf/1107/1107.5728v2.pdf http://arxiv.org/PS_cache/arxiv/pdf/1107/1107.5728v2.pdf [2] Every Economics 101 textbook ever written.
- FD3SA 15y ago
  Unfortunately, as you've alluded to in your post, capitalism is a winner take all game of poker that never ends. This means that those with capital have disproportionate leverage over other players, to such a degree that skill and chance become almost negligible. To have any chance of becoming a force in the game, you have to accrue massive capital by going all in with every hand you are dealt and every chip you have; i.e. the startup philosophy. However, this does not stop the trend of capital consolidation in the hands of fewer and fewer players. Conversely, the rapid advancement of technology allows even more leverage for skilled and/or lucky and/or wealthy players to exert their influence over the market. Capitalism will not be logical once a trillionaire emerges with enough purchasing power to decide the fate of the entire economic market. By definition, the current capitalistic model of economics is transient, and will not reach steady state. Once the system has crashed beyond repair, I pray that intelligent engineers can construct a new system which better allocates the world's resources to its many needs.
  - eligottlieb 15y ago
    One of the few things that actually stands to make a difference in this zone is the possible implementation of crowdfunding laws. If small, new businesses like start-ups could actually raise investment through crowdfunding (ie: through people who don't have the 1%-er status to qualify as accredited investors), it would be possible to use capital sources not already controlled by the existing players.
- gaius 15y ago
  That is disingenuous - what looks like shares owned by Bank X is really the mutual funds of a million ordinary citizens, administered on their behalf by Bank X.
codeonfire 15y ago
Cut out one layer of middlemen do-nothings trying to deliver the product of the rank and file as their own effort and any industry could easily afford it.
gaius 15y ago
Apple earned $400000 in profit per employee last year, more than Goldman Sachs [1] [1] http://articles.businessinsider.com/2012-01-23/tech/30654463_1_apple-exxon-mobil-iphones http://articles.businessinsider.com/2012-01-23/tech/30654463...

deleted 15y ago

[deleted]

olalonde 15y ago

The problem is that outside of finance, it's very difficult to measure a programmer's productivity.