5 ms·

> No it's not really a choice. Hard disagree. Have never worked for "terrible big company" (though some mediocre medium companies!) But outside of the super hi

> No it's not really a choice. Hard disagree. Have never worked for "terrible big company" (though some mediocre medium companies!) But outside of the super high cost of living areas like NYC and San Francisco, it's trivially simple (if not easy) to live on $50-60K USD each year (adjust this number for inflation as needed) while still enjoying yourself, having high performance technology, doing some travel, etc. You can't buy every damn thing you want or live like a millionaire, but you can live a great life. How many software / engineering jobs in the U.S., excluding terrible big tech companies, pay more than $60k USD per year? Almost all of them. In fact, it's not hard to make well over $100k. And live on half that. So you don't have to work forever just because you're not making $500k USD each year at some huge terrible tech company.

anvil-on-my-toe 3y ago
$60-100k salary is not enough to support a family and retire; it's probably not enough for a single person to make meaningful progress towards retirement because at that level of pay home ownership is constantly out of reach and inflation outpaces wage growth. It's sacrificing your life so someone else can get rich.
- neogodless 3y ago
  In today's environment, home prices really seem to be getting nuts. As I said, anyone in software is likely making over $100K. A $500K house with 20% down would have a P&I payment of $2,715 / month (at 7.2%, plus taxes/insurance.) That's less than $33K / year. (I bought my first house for $155K making $55K / year, and my second house for $390K making $100K.) If you're making over $100K, and spending under a third of it on housing, you should be able to afford to live, unless you're careless with your money. I don't think I'm making any sacrifices in my life, because I don't think of the things you can overspend on as sacrifices. As I said, I eat well (at home and at restaurants), I travel, I have great technology / toys. And at 44 I have a 7 figure net worth. Because I'm still spending under $65K USD / year, I could likely live off investments in a few more years, though being in software, it's easy to continue contracting on my own terms and having extra money.
  - anvil-on-my-toe 3y ago
    $100k for a down payment - how many years of saving does that take and what happens to that $500k price tag during those years of saving? One hardship like a medical issue, a setback in employment, or a child you weren't ready for, then what? And I'm not sure you could find a one bedroom, one bathroom for $500k in a city with tech jobs.
    - neogodless 3y ago
      In places where houses are $500K, rent is probably $2000 / month. (More like $1200 - 5000 / month, but depending on the size, location, amenities, luxuriousness of fixtures, etc.) If you make barely $100K, and are spending $24K on rent, let's say you spend half of the rest on living. That leaves you with $38K savings per year. So it takes you 32 months to save up $100K for a down payment. The secret is don't spend all of the money you make. Well it's not a secret, but it's also not "normal." It's culturally normal to spend all of your money, and then wonder why you can't build up savings. But if you're a software engineer with an income of 6 figures, you really should be able to figure out how to live a good life without spending every last dollar.
      - sokoloff 3y ago
        Does this $100K/yr earner pay no income taxes and FICA somehow?
      - anvil-on-my-toe 3y ago
        You forgot taxes. $38k - $27k in taxes = $11k savings. So 9 years to save up, by which time housing inflation will have taken the price to ~$700k. You are then $40k short for the down payment.
        neogodless 3y ago
        Do you know a lot of software engineers that barely make $100k? That's why I'm not getting caught up in the particulars of this example.
- bigbillheck 3y ago
  Median household income in the US is $71k.
- art-not 3y ago
  I live in Toronto. The lowest I've seen for a job listing at a tech-oriented small company was 90k on the low end(the job listing was 90k-120k), and this was for someone with 2 years experience. I've never seen a tech or tech-adjacent company offer 60k for even new grads. Most small companies I've seen offer for someone with 5+ years of solid experience a minimum of 120k USD. These are for remote jobs.
- ta988 3y ago
  So you say a salary above the median salary is not enough? This raises a big question of how is half the population in the country getting by.
  - booleandilemma 3y ago
    I've been very confused about how people are getting by. If they're not in tech, and and they're not a member of the professional class (doctor, lawyer, etc), how are they doing it? Is everyone working two jobs and doing uber on top of that, or what? How much of a bubble am I in? I'm in tech and I feel like I'm barely making it.
    - lacrimacida 3y ago
      Middle class has been and continues to being squished and crushed, things are getting worse and worse if you haven’t noticed. And it’s not just in the US, but also other western economies such as Germany, France, UK, etc.
    - gtowey 3y ago
      I wonder the same thing. I suspect that the answer is they carry a lot of debt that they never really expect to pay off.
  - thatfrenchguy 3y ago
    « Retire early » is the main part you’re missing from their argument, that implies saving large portions of disposable income. I always feel sad when people have high paying jobs they hate just so that « retire early » though, in a field like software engineering you can find a happy medium I feel like.
    - Fargren 3y ago
      The happy medium for me would be working less than 20 hours per week. It's not about the work but about how much time it consumes. And part time software engineering jobs don't seem to exist... I would happily live on half my income for half my hours. But if retiring early is more realistic than that (and it seems to be), I'll take it.
- hef19898 3y ago
  Well, not being able to retire at 60-100k is such an US problem... It is enough to easily retirely at whatever the legal retirement age is, earlier if I include all tue benefits my boring big corp job and collectively bargained salary provide.
Draiken 3y ago
You can always lower your standard of living, sure. But that's a different conversation IMO. I guess technically that's a choice, but it's so bad in the long term I personally can't consider it valid.
- neogodless 3y ago
  Can you elaborate? As I've never raised my standard of living to spending over $100K / year, I don't exactly know what I'm missing. I think more to your point, yes there is a choice - to make $500K at a "big bad tech company" and then spend like there's no tomorrow on things that you feel are worth spending all that money on, hoping that it makes up for the 40 hours you spend working (and maybe hating?) Or you enjoy your 40 hour job, make less, spend less. But spending money doesn't have a direct and equal correlation with life satisfaction. I spend about $65K / year (for two people, no kids), and I feel like I have an amazing life, and spending a bunch more money would, at best, have small incremental returns on life satisfaction.
  - Draiken 3y ago
    Of course! I have also never raised my spending to anything close to that. Nor I have the choice of making $500k (I wish). When I mention standard of living I don't mean spending like crazy. I mean not having to constantly worry that if you lose your job you can't make your mortgage in a few months. I save around 50% of my salary and I'd save even more if I didn't have a kid and wasn't the sole provider in my home right now. Not because I wouldn't love to be living like a king, but because for me that's the only option I have to afford a life long term. What if I die? What if I get hurt and can't work anymore? What if me or my wife gets sick and we can't treat it with the limited free healthcare we have access to? Even barring that. I absolutely hate that I have to give away the prime hours of my day to ensure me and my family can simply survive. I don't want to do that forever. I'd much rather use all I know to build software that actually makes a difference. Read more, experience life more. Travel at least once in my life. Enjoy life while I'm not declining physically and mentally. I could definitely earn less and live a less stressful life in a better company if I wanted to. But that's the kind of decision that will most likely come back to haunt me and my family in the long term. Maybe I get very lucky and none of those things happen, and all the time I suffered through those soulless jobs was not needed. But in my view that's a risk I'm willing to take. To your point, if you are talking about simply getting all that extra money and spend it all without a care, I agree. That's a choice but one I don't have the same sympathy for.

anvil-on-my-toe 3y ago

$60-100k salary is not enough to support a family and retire; it's probably not enough for a single person to make meaningful progress towards retirement because at that level of pay home ownership is constantly out of reach and inflation outpaces wage growth. It's sacrificing your life so someone else can get rich.

neogodless 3y ago
In today's environment, home prices really seem to be getting nuts. As I said, anyone in software is likely making over $100K. A $500K house with 20% down would have a P&I payment of $2,715 / month (at 7.2%, plus taxes/insurance.) That's less than $33K / year. (I bought my first house for $155K making $55K / year, and my second house for $390K making $100K.) If you're making over $100K, and spending under a third of it on housing, you should be able to afford to live, unless you're careless with your money. I don't think I'm making any sacrifices in my life, because I don't think of the things you can overspend on as sacrifices. As I said, I eat well (at home and at restaurants), I travel, I have great technology / toys. And at 44 I have a 7 figure net worth. Because I'm still spending under $65K USD / year, I could likely live off investments in a few more years, though being in software, it's easy to continue contracting on my own terms and having extra money.
- anvil-on-my-toe 3y ago
  $100k for a down payment - how many years of saving does that take and what happens to that $500k price tag during those years of saving? One hardship like a medical issue, a setback in employment, or a child you weren't ready for, then what? And I'm not sure you could find a one bedroom, one bathroom for $500k in a city with tech jobs.
  - neogodless 3y ago
    In places where houses are $500K, rent is probably $2000 / month. (More like $1200 - 5000 / month, but depending on the size, location, amenities, luxuriousness of fixtures, etc.) If you make barely $100K, and are spending $24K on rent, let's say you spend half of the rest on living. That leaves you with $38K savings per year. So it takes you 32 months to save up $100K for a down payment. The secret is don't spend all of the money you make. Well it's not a secret, but it's also not "normal." It's culturally normal to spend all of your money, and then wonder why you can't build up savings. But if you're a software engineer with an income of 6 figures, you really should be able to figure out how to live a good life without spending every last dollar.
    - sokoloff 3y ago
      Does this $100K/yr earner pay no income taxes and FICA somehow?
    - anvil-on-my-toe 3y ago
      You forgot taxes. $38k - $27k in taxes = $11k savings. So 9 years to save up, by which time housing inflation will have taken the price to ~$700k. You are then $40k short for the down payment.
      - neogodless 3y ago
        Do you know a lot of software engineers that barely make $100k? That's why I'm not getting caught up in the particulars of this example.
bigbillheck 3y ago
Median household income in the US is $71k.
art-not 3y ago
I live in Toronto. The lowest I've seen for a job listing at a tech-oriented small company was 90k on the low end(the job listing was 90k-120k), and this was for someone with 2 years experience. I've never seen a tech or tech-adjacent company offer 60k for even new grads. Most small companies I've seen offer for someone with 5+ years of solid experience a minimum of 120k USD. These are for remote jobs.
ta988 3y ago
So you say a salary above the median salary is not enough? This raises a big question of how is half the population in the country getting by.
- booleandilemma 3y ago
  I've been very confused about how people are getting by. If they're not in tech, and and they're not a member of the professional class (doctor, lawyer, etc), how are they doing it? Is everyone working two jobs and doing uber on top of that, or what? How much of a bubble am I in? I'm in tech and I feel like I'm barely making it.
  - lacrimacida 3y ago
    Middle class has been and continues to being squished and crushed, things are getting worse and worse if you haven’t noticed. And it’s not just in the US, but also other western economies such as Germany, France, UK, etc.
  - gtowey 3y ago
    I wonder the same thing. I suspect that the answer is they carry a lot of debt that they never really expect to pay off.
- thatfrenchguy 3y ago
  « Retire early » is the main part you’re missing from their argument, that implies saving large portions of disposable income. I always feel sad when people have high paying jobs they hate just so that « retire early » though, in a field like software engineering you can find a happy medium I feel like.
  - Fargren 3y ago
    The happy medium for me would be working less than 20 hours per week. It's not about the work but about how much time it consumes. And part time software engineering jobs don't seem to exist... I would happily live on half my income for half my hours. But if retiring early is more realistic than that (and it seems to be), I'll take it.
hef19898 3y ago
Well, not being able to retire at 60-100k is such an US problem... It is enough to easily retirely at whatever the legal retirement age is, earlier if I include all tue benefits my boring big corp job and collectively bargained salary provide.

Draiken 3y ago

You can always lower your standard of living, sure. But that's a different conversation IMO. I guess technically that's a choice, but it's so bad in the long term I personally can't consider it valid.

neogodless 3y ago
Can you elaborate? As I've never raised my standard of living to spending over $100K / year, I don't exactly know what I'm missing. I think more to your point, yes there is a choice - to make $500K at a "big bad tech company" and then spend like there's no tomorrow on things that you feel are worth spending all that money on, hoping that it makes up for the 40 hours you spend working (and maybe hating?) Or you enjoy your 40 hour job, make less, spend less. But spending money doesn't have a direct and equal correlation with life satisfaction. I spend about $65K / year (for two people, no kids), and I feel like I have an amazing life, and spending a bunch more money would, at best, have small incremental returns on life satisfaction.
- Draiken 3y ago
  Of course! I have also never raised my spending to anything close to that. Nor I have the choice of making $500k (I wish). When I mention standard of living I don't mean spending like crazy. I mean not having to constantly worry that if you lose your job you can't make your mortgage in a few months. I save around 50% of my salary and I'd save even more if I didn't have a kid and wasn't the sole provider in my home right now. Not because I wouldn't love to be living like a king, but because for me that's the only option I have to afford a life long term. What if I die? What if I get hurt and can't work anymore? What if me or my wife gets sick and we can't treat it with the limited free healthcare we have access to? Even barring that. I absolutely hate that I have to give away the prime hours of my day to ensure me and my family can simply survive. I don't want to do that forever. I'd much rather use all I know to build software that actually makes a difference. Read more, experience life more. Travel at least once in my life. Enjoy life while I'm not declining physically and mentally. I could definitely earn less and live a less stressful life in a better company if I wanted to. But that's the kind of decision that will most likely come back to haunt me and my family in the long term. Maybe I get very lucky and none of those things happen, and all the time I suffered through those soulless jobs was not needed. But in my view that's a risk I'm willing to take. To your point, if you are talking about simply getting all that extra money and spend it all without a care, I agree. That's a choice but one I don't have the same sympathy for.