4 ms·

We add immense value, yet we seen almost none of the profit of that value. Underpaid to say the least-- especially considering the value of money has steadily d

We add immense value, yet we seen almost none of the profit of that value. Underpaid to say the least-- especially considering the value of money has steadily declined (overall) since 1972. I saw a number someone quotes in a comment of _$120,000_ but it doesn't go as far as it did in the nineties. Realistically, that wage should be closer to $180k or more now-a-days-- but it's not. Plus the real moral of the story is: your business is either capital intensive, or labor intensive. Software Tech isn't really capital intensive (per dollar) but is extremely labor intensive. If tech companies want more talent perhaps they shouldn't build their campuses on some of the most expensive land in the country. That'd probably save a lot right there. I'd be willing to bet Facebook wants more H1-Bs because it helps their bottom line (decreasing costs), which increases their profit margin, which increases their stock price... A dollar saved, is a dollar earned-- ask an accountant.

3EAFC164D817 12y ago
> We add immense value, yet we seen almost none of the profit of that value. Underpaid to say the least-- especially considering the value of money has steadily declined (overall) since 1972. You will be paid in technology in financial services [if you are worth it].
- dmourati 12y ago
  I'm sorry, I don't understand this statement.
  - 3EAFC164D817 12y ago
    The parent claims tech workers are underpaid. The thesis of my statement is that if you are a tech worker in financial services, you will be paid fairly. Just because some parts of the market may be dislocated does not mean there are not fair paying jobs to be had.
bluthru 12y ago
>If tech companies want more talent perhaps they shouldn't build their campuses on some of the most expensive land in the country. That'd probably save a lot right there. It's expensive because it's desirable. Much of today's workforce doesn't want to live in the suburbs and drive to an office park. Living in a vibrant urban area is part of compensation for many.
- slantedview 12y ago
  Except when cost of living in that vibrant urban area is a few times the national average, as tends to be the case in tech hubs.
- wyclif 12y ago
  He's not really talking about a vibrant urban area. He's talking about a more expensive office park, and a place where a six-figure income isn't getting you ahead because of the cost of living (especially if you have a family).

3EAFC164D817 12y ago

> We add immense value, yet we seen almost none of the profit of that value. Underpaid to say the least-- especially considering the value of money has steadily declined (overall) since 1972. You will be paid in technology in financial services [if you are worth it].

dmourati 12y ago
I'm sorry, I don't understand this statement.
- 3EAFC164D817 12y ago
  The parent claims tech workers are underpaid. The thesis of my statement is that if you are a tech worker in financial services, you will be paid fairly. Just because some parts of the market may be dislocated does not mean there are not fair paying jobs to be had.

bluthru 12y ago

>If tech companies want more talent perhaps they shouldn't build their campuses on some of the most expensive land in the country. That'd probably save a lot right there. It's expensive because it's desirable. Much of today's workforce doesn't want to live in the suburbs and drive to an office park. Living in a vibrant urban area is part of compensation for many.

slantedview 12y ago
Except when cost of living in that vibrant urban area is a few times the national average, as tends to be the case in tech hubs.
wyclif 12y ago
He's not really talking about a vibrant urban area. He's talking about a more expensive office park, and a place where a six-figure income isn't getting you ahead because of the cost of living (especially if you have a family).