3 ms·

Not sure I'd characterize ex-FAANG employees, who are still likelier to get future job opportunities than people who loyally stuck it out at No-name Software Co

Not sure I'd characterize ex-FAANG employees, who are still likelier to get future job opportunities than people who loyally stuck it out at No-name Software Co in Des Moines, and who probably made 200k+ for a while, "little people".

samsari 3y ago
You are doing their job for them. A worker with slightly better prospects than others is still just a worker and ultimately still in the same precarious situation as they must still seek employment to earn a salary to live.
- jrochkind1 3y ago
  So is the CEO also just a worker who must seek employment to earn a salary to live? Why or why not?
  - kiliantics 3y ago
    In some sense yes, if they couldn't live only from the return on their investments, they are technically a worker. That would be the Marxist definition but it's obviously more of a spectrum than a binary. CEOs in most large companies of course have enough wealth that they could live on that alone and they are only working as CEOs in order to increase that wealth. Their work also plays an anti-labour role in collaborating with the shareholder class against the interests of the worker.
    - jrochkind1 3y ago
      I suspect there are quite a few software engineers who have been making $250K+ for some years who could live on the return on their investments alone. I mean, I guess it also depends on live at what standard of living. At the standard of living they are "accustomed to", or at the standard of living of someone making $50K a year? Some larger number of software engineers who have been making $250K could live on their investment income alone for equiv of $50K/year after taxes. So, right, more of a spectrum than a binary -- you see why some people are dubious of whether a software engineer making $250K a year is really in the same class as a retail worker making $50K a year (or less; federal minimum wage is still $7.25; my state's minimum wage is $13.25, less than $30k/year, a shockingly small amount to many of us, that many people actually make) On other conversations, people have suggested that whether you are a "boss" and can hire and fire is determinative. But again, a fast food "manager" might be making only $50K a year, while a software engineer who does not manage people might be making $250K or more. The software engineer is a "worker" who definitely has the same class interests as a walmart worker, but the fast food manager is definitely not? Doesn't really check out. You say "the Marxist definition", but I think that's actually a huge over-simplification of a Marxist analysis. Your class position and interests have to do with your income, your "relationship to the means of production" (role in the economy), your wealth, and other things. And it's probably useful to consider more than 2 or even 3 classes, and sub-classes within classes. I think it's a huge over-simplification to claim that every software engineer making $250K surely is in the same class and has the same class interests as every fast food worker making $12/hour. That's not in fact a good Marxist analysis at all. The pandemic made it pretty clear to me that there is definitely a class divide between the people in jobs where they paid to work from home (or in many cases, especially at first, stay home and not work); and the people who had to come in to get paid and/or who were were told not to come/laid off because there was no work to do.
- robertlagrant 3y ago
  What do you mean? What should this person do if not work for someone else? Start their own business?
- automatic6131 3y ago
  >ultimately still in the same precarious situation as they must still seek employment to earn a salary to live. But earning a salary that, when used well, can last several YEARS of unemployment, makes them a very different category of worker. These are the last workers that need help, of all the world's workers.
  - sureglymop 3y ago
    Ultimately the parent comment is about accountability. This is an extreme example, but if a billionaire kills another billionaire, would you "forgive" the perpetrator because the victim was relatively privileged compared to any other potential victim? No. That's not how accountability works. It is irrelevant here whether "even littler people" exist.
ElFitz 3y ago
It really depends on what your reference is. Compared to the average American? No, indeed, you wouldn’t. Compared to the CEOs and major shareholders of the biggest companies out there? Yes, one could make the argument. There’s a bigger financial gap between someone with 1 billion, or even 100 million, in the bank and someone making 200k than between someone working at minimum wage and someone making 200k. Although there are other relevant factors that would be worth taking into consideration when making such comparisons (quality of life and financial security come to mind), most of us actually are very small fry compared to them.
- listenallyall 3y ago
  This is so ridiculous. Why are you comparing anyone to a billionaire? If you've been making 200k+ for a few years and you have FAANG on your resume, you should have no problem getting through a few months without a paycheck, further, FAANG will, certainly, give you a better chance in future job applications. A person making minimi wage has none of these advantages. Software and tech companies have had multiple boom and bust cycles since the 1980s. Even in good times there are always a few companies that simply don't make it. If you go into tech, that's a choice, you know you won't have a job for life, and you need to plan for such. If that makes you uncomfortable, go get a job with the government, or learn a trade (are plumbers ever short on work?), or become a doctor/lawyer.
  - ElFitz 3y ago
    Is this "you" a generic one, or directed towards me specifically?

samsari 3y ago

You are doing their job for them. A worker with slightly better prospects than others is still just a worker and ultimately still in the same precarious situation as they must still seek employment to earn a salary to live.

jrochkind1 3y ago
So is the CEO also just a worker who must seek employment to earn a salary to live? Why or why not?
- kiliantics 3y ago
  In some sense yes, if they couldn't live only from the return on their investments, they are technically a worker. That would be the Marxist definition but it's obviously more of a spectrum than a binary. CEOs in most large companies of course have enough wealth that they could live on that alone and they are only working as CEOs in order to increase that wealth. Their work also plays an anti-labour role in collaborating with the shareholder class against the interests of the worker.
  - jrochkind1 3y ago
    I suspect there are quite a few software engineers who have been making $250K+ for some years who could live on the return on their investments alone. I mean, I guess it also depends on live at what standard of living. At the standard of living they are "accustomed to", or at the standard of living of someone making $50K a year? Some larger number of software engineers who have been making $250K could live on their investment income alone for equiv of $50K/year after taxes. So, right, more of a spectrum than a binary -- you see why some people are dubious of whether a software engineer making $250K a year is really in the same class as a retail worker making $50K a year (or less; federal minimum wage is still $7.25; my state's minimum wage is $13.25, less than $30k/year, a shockingly small amount to many of us, that many people actually make) On other conversations, people have suggested that whether you are a "boss" and can hire and fire is determinative. But again, a fast food "manager" might be making only $50K a year, while a software engineer who does not manage people might be making $250K or more. The software engineer is a "worker" who definitely has the same class interests as a walmart worker, but the fast food manager is definitely not? Doesn't really check out. You say "the Marxist definition", but I think that's actually a huge over-simplification of a Marxist analysis. Your class position and interests have to do with your income, your "relationship to the means of production" (role in the economy), your wealth, and other things. And it's probably useful to consider more than 2 or even 3 classes, and sub-classes within classes. I think it's a huge over-simplification to claim that every software engineer making $250K surely is in the same class and has the same class interests as every fast food worker making $12/hour. That's not in fact a good Marxist analysis at all. The pandemic made it pretty clear to me that there is definitely a class divide between the people in jobs where they paid to work from home (or in many cases, especially at first, stay home and not work); and the people who had to come in to get paid and/or who were were told not to come/laid off because there was no work to do.
robertlagrant 3y ago
What do you mean? What should this person do if not work for someone else? Start their own business?
automatic6131 3y ago
>ultimately still in the same precarious situation as they must still seek employment to earn a salary to live. But earning a salary that, when used well, can last several YEARS of unemployment, makes them a very different category of worker. These are the last workers that need help, of all the world's workers.
- sureglymop 3y ago
  Ultimately the parent comment is about accountability. This is an extreme example, but if a billionaire kills another billionaire, would you "forgive" the perpetrator because the victim was relatively privileged compared to any other potential victim? No. That's not how accountability works. It is irrelevant here whether "even littler people" exist.

ElFitz 3y ago

It really depends on what your reference is. Compared to the average American? No, indeed, you wouldn’t. Compared to the CEOs and major shareholders of the biggest companies out there? Yes, one could make the argument. There’s a bigger financial gap between someone with 1 billion, or even 100 million, in the bank and someone making 200k than between someone working at minimum wage and someone making 200k. Although there are other relevant factors that would be worth taking into consideration when making such comparisons (quality of life and financial security come to mind), most of us actually are very small fry compared to them.

listenallyall 3y ago
This is so ridiculous. Why are you comparing anyone to a billionaire? If you've been making 200k+ for a few years and you have FAANG on your resume, you should have no problem getting through a few months without a paycheck, further, FAANG will, certainly, give you a better chance in future job applications. A person making minimi wage has none of these advantages. Software and tech companies have had multiple boom and bust cycles since the 1980s. Even in good times there are always a few companies that simply don't make it. If you go into tech, that's a choice, you know you won't have a job for life, and you need to plan for such. If that makes you uncomfortable, go get a job with the government, or learn a trade (are plumbers ever short on work?), or become a doctor/lawyer.
- ElFitz 3y ago
  Is this "you" a generic one, or directed towards me specifically?