4 ms·

$200 /hr is a pretty low consulting rate. You are never going to be 100% utilized, so right off the bat you can divide that $400k by at least 50% over a long pe

$200 /hr is a pretty low consulting rate. You are never going to be 100% utilized, so right off the bat you can divide that $400k by at least 50% over a long period of time. You also have to pay for your own insurance, equipment... $200 /hr would be what I would consider to be the going rate for any mid level, non-FAANG type developer and pretty fair imho!

renewiltord 1y ago
Seems fine to me if it's well known so that donors know what they're getting.
armchairhacker 1y ago
Another part of the article mentions him "wasting" money > Andre needed an adapter, so I ran up to lend him mine. As he was giving it back, I recall him making a half-joking, flippant remark about either his dongle or his computer, saying that "Ruby Together will just buy me another one." It really rubbed me the wrong way. Over the years to follow, more than one person told me stories of Andre paying for shared meals on behalf of Ruby Together without an apparent legitimate justification. The article also accuses him of misrepresenting if not lying where certain donations went when soliciting more. Presumably, if he had justified reasons to need more funds, he could've said them. Granted, we don't know how much Andre was making and what his expenses were, and the article seems to have its own biases. But I think at least the general outline of Andre's (and his organization's) funds/expenses should be public and accurate, so potential donors can decide whether he really needs their funds or another project needs them more.
- wgjordan 1y ago
  It's a legal requirement for most US non-profits to file public and accurate accounting of their funds and expenses, Ruby Together is no exception and all the info is publicly available [1]. Having previously worked as a software engineer at an ed-tech non-profit, I found nothing nefarious or unusual in Andre receiving compensation for his work or in the anecdotes around expensing business-related technology purchases or meals to his employer, this is all standard industry practice. [1] https://projects.propublica.org/nonprofits/organizations/473176659 https://projects.propublica.org/nonprofits/organizations/473...
mystraline 1y ago
And in the USA, if you volunteer professional labor, you cannot take it off on your taxes. So yeah, if I can't get the benefit of taking off of my taxes, I do want paid. Can't afford it otherwise, since my labor is taxed and simultaneously valued as 0 as a volunteer.
- afandian 1y ago
  Are you saying that if you donate your time without pay you would still be taxed as though you _had_ been paid?
  - hobs 1y ago
    No, that's not how it works in the USA - apparently this person wants a tax deduction for their voluntary contribution as if it was a financial contribution to a non-profit which is tax deductible.
    - cyphar 1y ago
      On the flip side, contributions have financial value, otherwise what are we all doing here? I don't think they want a tax deduction necessarily, they're just pointing out that because of how voluntary labour is valued by the tax system it is rational to want to be paid for contributing to non-profits instead of doing it for free. If you spent N hours working and donated your $X*N salary to a non-profit, you'd get a tax deduction for that amount. However if you instead spend the same N hours contributing, you get literally nothing even though the work should be valued at some fraction of $X*N if not the same value (and some laws such as campaign finance limits do treat volunteering of this form to be valued at standard rates even if it's unpaid, so this is not without precedent). I don't think a tax deduction like that would work (everyone will pretend to be donating 16 hours of volunteer time a day), so it's back to charging for your work as a contractor.
      - hobs 1y ago
        I just tell people to charge the non-profit a reasonable non corp rate. That would just be paid work for a non profit, which (the company) is already tax exempt.
bradgessler 1y ago
It’s also the SF Bay Area, which h has a very high cost of living. That context is important. Also the article was corrected, the rate was $150.

renewiltord 1y ago

Seems fine to me if it's well known so that donors know what they're getting.

armchairhacker 1y ago

Another part of the article mentions him "wasting" money > Andre needed an adapter, so I ran up to lend him mine. As he was giving it back, I recall him making a half-joking, flippant remark about either his dongle or his computer, saying that "Ruby Together will just buy me another one." It really rubbed me the wrong way. Over the years to follow, more than one person told me stories of Andre paying for shared meals on behalf of Ruby Together without an apparent legitimate justification. The article also accuses him of misrepresenting if not lying where certain donations went when soliciting more. Presumably, if he had justified reasons to need more funds, he could've said them. Granted, we don't know how much Andre was making and what his expenses were, and the article seems to have its own biases. But I think at least the general outline of Andre's (and his organization's) funds/expenses should be public and accurate, so potential donors can decide whether he really needs their funds or another project needs them more.

wgjordan 1y ago
It's a legal requirement for most US non-profits to file public and accurate accounting of their funds and expenses, Ruby Together is no exception and all the info is publicly available [1]. Having previously worked as a software engineer at an ed-tech non-profit, I found nothing nefarious or unusual in Andre receiving compensation for his work or in the anecdotes around expensing business-related technology purchases or meals to his employer, this is all standard industry practice. [1] https://projects.propublica.org/nonprofits/organizations/473176659 https://projects.propublica.org/nonprofits/organizations/473...

mystraline 1y ago

And in the USA, if you volunteer professional labor, you cannot take it off on your taxes. So yeah, if I can't get the benefit of taking off of my taxes, I do want paid. Can't afford it otherwise, since my labor is taxed and simultaneously valued as 0 as a volunteer.

afandian 1y ago
Are you saying that if you donate your time without pay you would still be taxed as though you _had_ been paid?
- hobs 1y ago
  No, that's not how it works in the USA - apparently this person wants a tax deduction for their voluntary contribution as if it was a financial contribution to a non-profit which is tax deductible.
  - cyphar 1y ago
    On the flip side, contributions have financial value, otherwise what are we all doing here? I don't think they want a tax deduction necessarily, they're just pointing out that because of how voluntary labour is valued by the tax system it is rational to want to be paid for contributing to non-profits instead of doing it for free. If you spent N hours working and donated your $X*N salary to a non-profit, you'd get a tax deduction for that amount. However if you instead spend the same N hours contributing, you get literally nothing even though the work should be valued at some fraction of $X*N if not the same value (and some laws such as campaign finance limits do treat volunteering of this form to be valued at standard rates even if it's unpaid, so this is not without precedent). I don't think a tax deduction like that would work (everyone will pretend to be donating 16 hours of volunteer time a day), so it's back to charging for your work as a contractor.
    - hobs 1y ago
      I just tell people to charge the non-profit a reasonable non corp rate. That would just be paid work for a non profit, which (the company) is already tax exempt.

bradgessler 1y ago

It’s also the SF Bay Area, which h has a very high cost of living. That context is important. Also the article was corrected, the rate was $150.