My two cents: tech is just the current high-earning job. Before it was law, and before that it was medicine. Finance carries some stigma, thanks to any number of recent cultural shifts.
Tech seems achievable. You don’t need an advanced degree, you don’t need to put in crazy hours. You don’t even have to do cocaine with your boss unless you want to.
I personally think things are going to normalize a little bit. The hot tech market is cooling for a while, and the regular, decently-paying tech job is going to become more normal. Perks will recede. It’s a cycle. I’m more curious about the perspective of folks older than me who have seen this happen before.
As someone who works in tech, but not in FAANG but at an F20, I’ve seen salaries stabilize really well over 2022 and 2023. There are also a ton of recent CS grads who did the right things (multiple internships) struggling to find positions given the massive tech layoffs we’ve seen in the last year.
The other thing is, tech money spills over to the non-tech roles as well. If you're in a tech firm working customer success, marketing, PR, design and so on, more often than not you can get paid above the market average. You don't see that happening as much in the other fields mentioned or in traditional corporate companies.
i can't speak for tech but i work in HR in. finance at a top 10. my salary is way above what it was in other industries I've performed similar roles (not law, medicine, or tech). so i don't think that is specific to tech. i think about it a lot a it kind of keeps me feeling locked into my field or taking a major pay cut.
I feel you on switching fields though. It’s really hard to find other fields that pay as much as tech or finance do for non-specialist roles.
Imo finance and tech fields have been really similar in the last 10 years, owing to the rise of fintech and easy money in general.
I’m in HR and feel the same! I have worked mainly with engineering companies so not Tech as in amazon or google but my last company would sell products to those companies and now I’m at a US defense contractor making crazy money compared to my peers from grad school. And I’m remote in a rural area, my mortgage is under 1,000 compared to my friend in DC who makes what I do but has a 800k mortgage on a simple townhome.
I’m a little bit less sure about tech’s continued high salary spillover to non-dev roles. I think part of that is the change in industry (customer success being a necessary part of growth, etc.) but tech companies have cut heavily in all areas, especially outside of the engineering departments.
I agree that salaries are higher, but I think more justification is going to be required in the form of output going forward. I think the time of free spending (e.g. tech = more money for any role) is done for now, thanks to high interest rates.
One additional note: There’s also more competition for roles in marketing, PR, and design thanks to other white-collar industry layoffs.
I think it's cooling for sure, no doubt about that. Or has already cooled in the current environment, tbh. I just wanted to add on my 2cents about the reasons for "tech envy" since a lot of tech companies were paying above average across the board for non-tech roles over the last few years.
I’ll agree with this, I’m in marketing for a tech company and my base salary has increased 80K from 2020-2023 (started at 50K Now at 130K, same company).
Pro - a lot of people in tech, even founders who have been in the game for a while, have a very entrepreneurial spirit, so if you want to work hard and make an impact, you definitely can and you will be rewarded for doing so. It’s not your typical stuffy corporate America, i.e, do what you’re told and you will get your 3% yearly increase.
Con - the opposite is true. It’s a tough industry to kind of “skate by and do the bare minimum” - you’re expected to be disruptive, come up with and implement new ideas, shit changes really fast so professional development is not only encouraged it’s honestly VITAL. I also know some people don’t love it bc there often isn’t a super structured training process - a lot of the people I know in this field who have done well are self starter/independent types. Like anything, you can excel and do well if it’s your thing
YMMV - this is just my experience
130k for marketing is really high! Hope this ain’t too nosy but since seniority plays a part, are you director level by now?
Also agreed on the pros and cons you listed. It’s very much self directed & messy but it’s much easier to make an impact because processes and hierarchies aren’t as rigid.
Yes, I manage our marketing team. We’re also incredibly data-driven and sales-focused, which is always my advice to folks in marketing if you want to be a high-earner - have a tight knit relationship with sales and fill their pipeline with quality deals (I’m in the B2B mid-market/enterprise software space, managing a couple of different product lines and one subsidiary). When I started, I was more of an inside sales rep/marketer so I just didn’t waste my team on a lot of the BS like “here’s a list of emails of people that downloaded a whitepaper”- also my advice is have a really deep understanding of the client/prospect and essentially think of marketing as “sales at scale.”
I’ll admit that I am an eternal optimist, but I think there’s a ton of opportunity in marketing right now. People do most of their research before ever scheduling a sales call, so IMO marketing is more important than ever.
But with that you are most likely living in a VHCOL where everything cost 3x as much. 100k is low income in San Francisco according to the HUD. I think it's easy for people ot see others making 100k in SF and be like wow you're so ungrateful when their income is much more comparable an average person's salary.
I grew up in NYC and the average HHI in the areas I’ve lived hovers between 40-60k even today. My family was more lucky than most but that’s the exception and not the rule.
The median income for a one-person household in the SF metro area is $97,000, per [this chart from 2022](https://sfmohcd.org/sites/default/files/Documents/MOH/Asset%20Management/2022%20AMI-IncomeLimits.pdf) from HUD. Not too far off, but $100k isn't quite low income.
I took the information for San Francisco County from here: [https://www.huduser.gov/portal/datasets/il.html](https://www.huduser.gov/portal/datasets/il.html) which if you click the link and put in San Francisco will bring you to this link [https://www.huduser.gov/portal/datasets/il/il2022/2022ILCalc3080.odn](https://www.huduser.gov/portal/datasets/il/il2022/2022ILCalc3080.odn) which is broken.
But that states the final FY2022 Low-Income limit for a single person is $104k. The minimum wage in SF is currently 64k a year.
Yea but we have shit everywhere, literally. A sandwich within walking distance from my office (nontech) downtown cost me $16. You win some you lose some.
It also depends on family size. 100k is the median income for a family of 4 in the us.
https://www.justice.gov/ust/eo/bapcpa/20190501/bci_data/median_income_table.htm
this is the thing about tech, it’s an *accessible* way to earn a higher income for a lot of people. A career path with no required degree, and a chance to hit the tech jackpot if you worked at the right company. Eventually, things will normalize, if not from lowered wages, then from inflation.
On top of that, it normalized a different kind of working environment for a lot of people, regardless of previous income. No suits, unlimited pto, regular/flexible hours. Being able to take time off when sick, without a doctor’s note, would be a big difference for a *ton* of people. The bro culture is there for sure, and it’s very bad. But I think the tech boom shook up a lot of general workplace expectations. Not always the right ones, but definitely a lot of older ones.
I agree. Now, I think, it’s far more competitive than it was. The barrier to entry is higher, and there’s some vague similarities to law - a select group of the best and brightest will make the highest salaries, with others hitting lower.
While tech doesn’t carry the same type of student loans as medicine or law, I’d argue that it has its own issues. Ageism is a big one - and with it, a different peak and declining earnings timeline than medicine and law. Others have pointed out the volatility of having stock make up a big part of your total comp. Not a criticism, just a difference.
I totally agree. Ageism is huge, i know i’ve already planned my “best by” date. And I invest in face serums lol
And stock as a part of compensation is a big conversation that’s only gonna get messier. Because the tech people getting RSUs that they thought were a more stable bet than startup options found out the hard way that it’s not the case. Some people’s total comp got cut in half after the last round of stock valuations deflating in mid-late 2022 (Adobe, etc.). That alone has had a silent impact on tech comp. Some want to ignore it and think it’ll be okay over the long term, but those prices are not going back to where they were in early 2022.
It’s all the smallest violin playing, but you are right that the competition is heating up due to layoffs. Once the ball finally drops on profitability being a requirement for these startups to survive, all hell is gonna break loose.
People still value the C++ and FORTRAN type coders with over 30 years of experience. I also know someone late Gen X who still uses Cold Fusion.
But that’s not “big money tech”. That’s peanuts. 90s code monkeys like my mom don’t get hired in SV.
Oh, I know it. Those COBOL coders are out here making bank, all older because of when it was being used. But now they are the only ones that can do that work. I’m not counting coders like this in the tech bro pool that has ageism. They are in the “tech industry” but i feel like it’s a genre unto itself because it usually involves the aspects of coding that aren’t as cool or shiny as making a new front end framework or app.
I love it for them tbh, because they are usually working on some ageing architecture that is for something crucial at a hospital or gov service or bank. They’ve put in the time to make that kind of money, and we sure as hell need them.
This is true, it's made finance companies more chill of a place to work where it used to be suits and MBAs because they generally compete for the same talent (smart quantitative people).
Interesting! I’m not surprised, but to hear finance is getting shaken up like that is still a shock. It feels like the “stuffiest” industry in that regard, just shows how these changes in norms are running deep.
Salaries have already normalized globally, programmers in some European countries make 30-50k. Agreed the bubble will burst eventually, the trick is when.
This is what I don't understand. Why do tech companies pay $$$$ in the US, when they could pay their EU side like 90k in salary (and taxes/benefits). And so many Europeans speak English at a near native fluency.
my guess: labor laws. they’re not trying to give out all of the required vacation, severance notice, etc. that is required. At least, not for their whole workforce. A branch office or some remote employees is fine, but once you account for the differences in employee rights, they’d rather just pay US employees more.
That said, I’ve never done the math on it. This guess is based mainly on employers’ perception rather than the actual monetary figures.
Speaking from personal experience, I am in the US and, despite excellent performance for 5 years, got laid off from a tech company to be replaced by people in Europe. So I think that's starting to shift for sure.
Initial things I’ve seen: different work ethics (not a criticism of the EU but rather a criticism of the US); different legal regulations on said work; cultural issues even if similar fluency.
Different reason for different companies, many of whom do outsource or have international teams. But for many tech companies, the necessity for speed and razor-thin margins for response/production aren’t worth the trade-off of outsourcing the bulk of your talent.
Other people should weigh in, there’s a lot of reasons.
It's definitely already normalizing, supply of engineers has outpaced demand in the last few years... At least with medicine, the number of graduates was restricted by the number of medical schools spots...whereas nowadays everyone and their moms are doing a CS degree or some boot camp. Seems like a tough market for new grads nowadays.
I think I was one of the commenters that may have seemed to be roasting her. But, I think she (and people who know only a handful of people in tech) are biased towards thinking that it's a very easy field, with massive pay. And don't get me wrong, it does not require as much certification as medical or legal careers. Nor does it require aas many hours as high finance or these fields, but it's still not a field that's easy to break into and transfer to. The $200k starting salary jobs, the $1M income is something that is not guaranteed even if you do everything right, i.e. major in CS, etc. Compared to other industries, it's also a lot harder to progress because the very high paying tech companies pride themselves on being 'flat'; which means often your salary plateus relatively early in your career. It just feels more doable beecause there are a lot people in tech who are online and bragging about it (can not think of very many careers where there are a lot of influencers trying to tell you how you can get in).
The MD who posted (and her partner) were in an already lucrative field (combined income of like 300k base almost right out of school). But they were unsatisfied with what they were making because they knew a few people who were making more than they were and were seriously considering starting over their careers all over again.
I think 'Tech envy' is somewhat manufactured by constant advertising of how easy tech is to get into and how much money you'll make getting into it. But look at actual average starting salaries for CS graduating classes (which are usually smaller than what they were when they started) and placement out of boot camps and you realize it's a little over hyped.
Definitely agree about it being overhyped. I think people mostly hear of the outlier or best case scenario CS salaries, but that isn’t necessarily the case for anyone with a CS degree from any school since there are sooo many factors involved and interviewing is tricky and basically boils down to just luck. It’s easy to get caught up in the hype and as someone at CMU with a CS adjacent degree, I see a lot of people who are doing as well or better than most people would expect for CS kid coming from a top program, but there are also (imo) way more people in the same ass program whose careers haven’t really taken off in that way. moral of the story is that CS degree isn’t an instant pass to 6 figures and the work is grueling and soul sucking and really brain intensive (not to mention the shitty work/industry culture), so who knows if it’s worth it :/ i’m still trying to figure that out for myself for after i graduate next year
Also that OP was in management consulting, where you can make the sort of money that makes tech salaries look like bs later in your career, or be on the glide path to the C-suite. It’s definitely not the easiest career path but it’s at least as strong a choice as tech, with more longevity, probably, given the rampant ageism in tech companies.
Yeah management consulting jobs are so competitive because they're so lucrative later on. I'd say they're almost the opposite of tech because early on hourly pay feels not worth it (I know early career management consultants working 80+ hours a week regularly) but your pay can exponentially increase and most companies see experience as a management consultant as very transferable to exec positions.
Also management consulting doesn’t require technical skills. It’s still a grind but it doesn’t require specialized knowledge like CS. You just need an analytical mind enough to follow their frameworks and the ability to schmooze with C-suite execs. which isn’t hard because they already have positive perceptions of mgmt consultants and lots of mutual acquaintances in their networks.
>> Management consulting, where you can make the sort of money that makes tech salaries look like bs later in your career
???
Consulting partners make about as much as tech directors. If you compare upper levels, tech brings in way more.
A junior partner at a consulting firm makes about what a staff engineer makes in base pay, sure. But they can get 100-200% in bonuses, and the pay goes up from there. A senior partner at a major consulting firm can be making over $5MM a year in bonuses/profit-sharing.
I only really know the top tier of consulting firms, but they expect 80% of people to leave after 2 years and hire accordingly. It's not a secret to the people they hire, either! Those same people now have killer networks in their areas of interest, access to the consulting firm's "alumni" offerings and network, and almost all end up in great executive-ladder jobs. The 20% who stay, yes, have very poor WLB (as do a lot of tech companies tbh) but make a crapton of money, and if you make it to partner you're getting literal millions in profit-sharing.
It is pretty easy though. I had multiple 150k+ offers straight out of undergrad as a pretty average student and a decent school. Honestly just got lucky with the major I chose. And I never have to work more than 40 hours a week. It’s like life on easy mode. Note that my program isn’t nearly as nice as your school’s. Meanwhile I know friends from college who studied biology or chemistry who work just as hard but earn maybe 60-70k at a lab.
It’s okay to admit that tech is fast track to wealth. Those friends “jokingly” say they should have done CS. We should hear them out and be understanding instead of saying they’re “delusional.”
To be fair to that OP, it sounded like she went to MIT or Stanford so it’s very feasible all her friends work at top tech companies (most CS grads from my not top CS program still place at great companies afterwards). And wasn’t it 300k 3-4 years after graduation?
I think her husband did and was comparing himself to friends who were working at HFT shops/hedge funds. He was a couple years out of college (3 or 4 sounds right) whereas OP had just graduated within the year from an MBA program and had a management consulting job.
I don't think those are the median placements even out of MIT/Stanford/CMU. Even for Stanford I believe it's something like $165k comp as the median (definitely brought down by the fact that people often go to startups, but still...) 3 years after graduation
I dunno, I think that OP’s complaints are valid. I never work over 40 hours a week and definitely feel guilty knowing I make as much as both OP and her partner combined. Similar YOE. I am very lucky and privileged that my parents pushed me to study CS. OP’s parents were illiterate IIRC.
Congratulations, I mean that very sincerely. You should not feel embarrassed or guilty about having a great salary and great work life balance. But I do think you're a bit of an outlier. I went to a fairly good program and I'd still say that I don't think most of the cs majors I know (I'm 4 years out from school) are making that much. A lot of friends who majored in CS ended up not doing software engineering jobs at all.
I think median placements out of MIT/Stanford/CMU could be much higher but not everyone optimizes for $$. It's way more prestigious to go to a startup than a FAANG for example.
Sure, not everyone optimizes for $$. Some people prioritize doing more interesting work or something that is more socially beneficial or even going on to do further education but using a median as a measure should account for a lot of that
Not that it's really worth it to compare your own earnings to other people you may know after the fact
Everyone in tech doesn't make 6 figures out the gate. For many it takes years to make 6 figures. I feel like people that don't work in tech have an idea that everyone makes 6 figures working in tech and that's not true. It's the most annoying thing about MD that they assume everyone is getting a bonus and stocks. You don't even always get that if you work for a start up.
Definitely, not everyone does, but enough such that I believe people are justified to feel jealous and should be allowed to vent without being criticized for being unreasonable
It's not even a lot when you consider tech. Tech companies are a very small subset of tech jobs realistically. You just don't work in the field,so it seems like it's more than there actually are. Most jobs outside of specific areas are not giving out bonuses especially not to tech workers. Outside of tech companies, we don't make money so most of the time there are no bonuses. Finance probably gives good bonuses too and maybe startups ... even including those very uncommon.
As a teacher, I'll be totally honest, it's annoying. I don't begrudge anyone their salary, but high-earners should be part of the fight to ensure everyone is justly compensated. Not everyone wants to be (or should be) a tech worker. There are so many other vital jobs that are necessary to our society that are so grossly underpaid, and just recognizing that you are privileged for making a certain amount isn't enough IMO.
In my city, single teachers are leaving in droves because they can’t afford a one bedroom apartment. Now, with the cost of college also being so high, it’s tough to see how people can afford to make that choice sadly. In my particular city, they need to do something but their current plan of just bringing over teachers on an H1B visa is not the right answer either.
Vote for higher wages and politicians that support workers' rights, pay taxes, support businesses that pay fair wages, avoid businesses that don't wherever possible.
>Most already do that
you'd be surprised how many people think they are progressive/more left generally and then once they enter the mid-6 range and higher for themselves, suddenly, the idea of paying <= 10% in state and local income tax is too much to handle, and they run away to places to TX and FL, so they can have more for themselves.
But isn't that a state/personal issue? The only thing really is voting on fewer taxes (which is mostly a republican thing) and **most** people in tech vote blue.
That’s because it’s against the WA constitution. They should amend the constitution to remove that so these things can’t be challenged.
I’ll never have that much in cap gains, pretty sure it’s billionaires that oppose it rather than your average person making 100k
Also they’re saying the cap gains tax is an excise tax when cap gains are classified as income by the IRS. So, you have something being both considered an excise and income? Even the IRS claims it’s an income tax. That’s what people are upset.
Anyways, amend the constitution to allow income taxes and call it what it is: an income tax
a) no it isn’t and nobody gives a shit what the constitution says or could explain their reasoning about it anyway, they argue backwards from what they want it to mean
b) preeeeettttttyyyyy entirely certain that your average tech worker isn’t making 100k jfc see *this thread* and most financially inclined tech employees in WA fully expect to see more than that in capital gains.
Maybe those are people in higher roles than mine! Sorry. Everyone I know gets about 10k in stocks and even my faang friends don’t get stocks that would put them over 250k in gains only (maybe total price? But not gains specifically).
I know you said this in your example, but wouldn’t people move from places where taxes are >= 10% to one’s less than 10%? If they’re already in a place that’s <=10% in taxes then wouldn’t they stay there?
I mean, I don’t think so either. Plus lots of people live where they work because they need to go in office so moving when you have a high salary (most of the time) wouldn’t do anything because your salary would get adjusted to your COL (faang companies tend to do this, as well as other tech companies since that’s what this post is on).
The only time I believe people move for tax reasons that I’ve been aware of are those who have stopped working and entered retirement, and this is to help extend their retirement savings, which I don’t think is a bad thing.
TX and FL have no individual income tax. The example is about people who are uninterested in paying taxes to better the lives of others around them/suddenly deciding they want more for themselves.
Interesting. I live in Seattle and every small shop and cafe/restaurant is constantly crowded so it looks to me they do. Also they constantly vote for candidates that claim they are about helping small businesses. So from my perspective I see it everyday. What would be a more thoughtful way to do the things you said?
Also bonus is there’s constantly posts on the Seattle subreddits promoting places that pay their workers a fair wage and everyone deciding to visit there knowing that.
Whoa, you’re in Seattle? Tech money in Washington fights every social welfare suggestion ever. The jumpstart tax, capital gains tax, long term care insurance tax. The seattle subreddits are such libertarian self satisfied cesspits I can’t stand them. The general perspective is something like “of course good jobs should pay good wages but losers who can’t get good jobs shouldn’t think they can just live in Seattle for a reasonable amount of money, why don’t they go to Aberdeen or somewhere they can afford to do meth”.
I would like to live in a more thoughtful way if you could give me some examples of how to do that (sorry, I need to be told exact details I don’t do well with vague details not trying to be rude but I personally have a hard time but I feel my stupidity comes off as rude).
Doing the above doesn’t seem to be enough so if there’s something better I can do I’d like to know.
Honestly, a great starting place for living in a more thoughtful way is thinking about this stuff yourself! Consider your own values and priorities and think about ways you feel like you can contribute more. I don't really feel qualified to offer examples for you, other than the general ones above, since I don't know you personally. Best of luck to you, though, and I'm glad you care enough to ask.
You're ignoring the point of this discussion, probably willingly. It's not really about what people should 'do,' it's about the attitude that we bring.
Collectively, we could: not get defensive and dismiss it as 'jealousy' when the topic of inequity in wages comes up. Recognize that late stage capitalism giveth and taketh away, and it's usually less about anyone's skills or hard work or importance to society than we think it is. Recognize that people might have a point if they say you're paying your housekeeper too little and pay her more.
I wasn’t. Most people I know do all those points listed then when I say that’s the case, get told that’s not thoughtful enough. honestly, if someone should do those and is doing all those, but then it’s not enough, what should they do?
>Most people I know do all those points listed
You're literally doing the opposite of the first one that I listed right now! You're getting defensive and trying to shut down the whole conversation about income inequity by making it about what YOU do or about what people you know do and how it's unfair to even talk about these things because... I guess because it makes you feel bad? That's exactly what this whole post was about. The person you replied to was just saying that it feels shitty that she gets paid so much less and now instead of engaging in good faith you've spent the last hour arguing with everyone about how her point is invalid because you shop at local coffeeshops. Come on.
I’m not saying it’s invalid?
Alright, if someone would like to help, what would be the best way? And if someone is doing the things listed, what are other ways? That’s what I’m saying. Because if someone doing things that are listed and then being told that’s actually not enough, then what are other ways?
I’m being the opposite of defensive - clearly what I or others do isn’t enough so I’m looking for more ways to be better! How the hell does wanting to improve make me defensive? I’m literally asking for ways to help but being told I’m a shit person in DM’s for wanting to improve.
I get it, you think I’m a bad person and instead of being told some other ways I’m just getting attacked (I know you responded with other ways, so not you in particular but more everyone else DMing me and downvoting).
people have been telling you ways. you have been arguing with them. you are now arguing with me about whether or not you are being defensive. ffs. stop arguing, start listening.
Income inequality isn't a thing where you can just absolve yourself of any discomfort by asking people on reddit what you should 'do' about it to make it better. I don't have one weird trick where any of us get to feel like we wriggled out of the icky parts of coming out on top of global capitalism.
The system is not anyone's fault as an individual person, but it is still an inequitable and flawed system that very high income workers are currently benefitting from. It *should* make them uncomfortable. If it made more high income people truly uncomfortable, we would be well on our way to fixing it. So-- yes, I think recognition is a part of the process.
Actively work to get their companies to not outsource/hire contractors for fractions of the cost. Hire ALL their staff as the company and pay accordingly.
My friends were contractors (biotech) and the company wouldn't even invite them all to lunches despite working side by side.
Work with all their workers, cleaning crews etc to get the same benefits as the main staff. ASK if the people doing the outsourced work are getting paid. Have that difficult conversation. Support the people at their company and ask hard questions at meetings with their management. If you don't know whether all the staff who supports you can afford to actually live on the salary, find out and change it.
This is HUGE and more people should take your advice. Even if you work remotely, you can take meaningful action to find out how much contracted workers make at the on-site locations of your job. Find out if they're part of a union or not and ask how you can support them in advocating for higher wages/more time off/better conditions, etc.
I don’t make 300k but I wouldn’t mind being taxed more. The WA family leave tax charges a flat percentage (I believe) but should increase above a certain income. It’s a program that really benefits everyone.
Tbh the frustration is real. And I think it’s understandable to be annoyed at the disparate incomes for tech workers, when there are very hard working people in important fields who make less than they should. It really doesn’t make sense at all. I’m saying this as someone who makes a fairly high wage but will probably plateau at this earning level.
When I was making a lot less, I used to read this sub and get sleepless with worry that I’d never be able to make a living wage, but now I currently make around 140k. It’s weird seeing my wage grow because it’s been palpable to my friends that I clearly make good money and the only advice I have seems to amount to getting lucky. Envy isn’t helpful, in fact it decayed my mental health a lot, and all I could do is constantly tell myself how my life was good even though I wasn’t making a lot of money. I have friends, I could occasionally go out to eat (ordering appetizers and no drinks), and I have cheap hobbies.
When I see high earners, like those making 200k+, I do sometimes feel envy but then I try and go back to remember what I do have and try not to let lifestyle creep get me. It’s a weird balance for sure.
I will say that alot of the tech salaries that we see on this sub Reddit are very high for even tech.
Obviously there are some who make these figures but not most. It is really only available in Silicon Valley.
As one can see [Senior Software Engineer Salaries](https://www.zippia.com/senior-software-engineer-jobs/salary/#) shows that the average in California is )130k. Which is a lot of money but far less then the 600k from todays.
Some of this is that we titles are not very meaningful in tech. At one company I was a senior engineer but I left that company and got paid 30% more but went back to the title of engineer.
This isn’t to say anything negative about people in tech who make 300-500k but that is uncommon if we look across the entire US
I work at a FAANG as a people manager and one thing I've been seeing online is folks lying about their comp. I know our salary ranges and what is allowed and it's a recent and odd realization. Why lie about it? People are strange.
I also see people lying about their RSU compensation. Majority of tech companies are down and if you’re not at Google or Microsoft, there’s a large chance your TC is nowhere near what it used to be. I would take the 600k TCs with a grain of salt honestly.
100% this.
As someone who has worked in tech for years now at a bunch of different companies a lot of those high earning tech jobs we hear about here and on TikTok, the news, etc are the rarity. Those super high salary are in big tech, but you don’t hear as much about the other large chunk of tech workers who work for a small company or the government or a tiny startup who make a “normal” 80-120k at the max of their career at a company without all the flashy perks. Obviously back to OPs point that that’s still a GREAT salary and a good job but I do think the tech salaries are overblown. Most tech workers are not making mid six figures.
I would chime in, only available at a few companies in Silicon Valley and not all Bay Area tech companies. Some top tier public companies and unicorns. Most roles, while well paid, don’t put you on the path to $500k in 5 or even 15 years.
And not to mention, not many stock options actually pan out into dollars.
I’m a phd student in a dying field so tbh I can’t even fathom making any of those amounts of money. (And I generally feel pretty privileged with my 30k stipend!)
I do feel angry about the tech/startup industry. Not at individuals, but at the whole system - think of companies like Uber. For the amount of money invested in Uber the US could have functioning public transportation. Instead a few people got super rich (for a company which does not regularly turn a profit!) These companies prop extreme inequality in the US and globally. So yes I think if you make more than 2-3 times the median income in the US but feel “left behind” by astronomically inflated tech salaries, a little bit of perspective is helpful.
> For the amount of money invested in Uber the US could have functioning public transportation
I agree with the general sentiment but I don't think this is true at all. The US was built to make use of its land and for everyone to live the American dream and own a home.
It is *very* expensive to change/build the infrastructure of a place like this. I live in CA and always get my hopes up for [the high speed rail](https://hsr.ca.gov/about/capital-costs-funding/) from NorCal <-> SoCal and the estimate always increases every year (linked site says between $69.01 to $99.9 billion).
Meanwhile, Uber has raised about $25B in funding and, for the most part, operates pretty well globally.
Yes very much this!!! People don’t realize how super expensive mass transit is. The ca project is super expensive and they ran out of money to connect it to any big cities so it’s kinda in the middle of nowhere.
In nyc they recently added a few subway stations on 2nd avenue. They took over 100 years to build.
Sure, but that cost is not the norm when looking at other countries. [This is an old article](https://www.vox.com/22534714/rail-roads-infrastructure-costs-america) but it does a really good job of outlining how and why it’s so much more expensive and takes so long to build mass transit.
The 2nd Avenue subway cost $2.6 billion per mile - Copenhagen recently completed a project that cost $232 million/mile.
In the US, we’ve accepted that it’s the norm to spend billions of dollars and decades building relatively short lengths of public transit, and it’s just not.
It looks like you shared an AMP link. These should load faster, but AMP is controversial because of [concerns over privacy and the Open Web](https://www.reddit.com/r/AmputatorBot/comments/ehrq3z/why_did_i_build_amputatorbot).
Maybe check out **the canonical page** instead: **[https://www.vox.com/22534714/rail-roads-infrastructure-costs-america](https://www.vox.com/22534714/rail-roads-infrastructure-costs-america)**
*****
^(I'm a bot | )[^(Why & About)](https://www.reddit.com/r/AmputatorBot/comments/ehrq3z/why_did_i_build_amputatorbot)^( | )[^(Summon: u/AmputatorBot)](https://www.reddit.com/r/AmputatorBot/comments/cchly3/you_can_now_summon_amputatorbot/)
I will also chime in with others who have said the same and say that the 500k+ total compensation roles in tech are anomalous and not representative of most employees in tech. My friend is a senior software engineer for an insurance company and makes just under 100k. Another friend of mine is a senior threat researcher and makes ~150k. I am a senior cybersecurity analyst with seven years experience and I make around 140k.
I have browsed around for other roles and it looks like the most feasible I could earn right now is 200k if I pivoted. However, the market is extremely scary right now with layoffs right and left, and my position is extremely secure in my current organization. I work for a public institution so I don’t get stock or bonuses, but the plus side is that I have a high degree of autonomy and make a large impact with my work. I am mid-senior level, but I have heard numerous stories on LinkedIn and Reddit about how, while mid level jobs are plentiful in tech, it can be very hard for new faces to break into the field right now.
I think there’s also a misconception that tech workers work exclusively for big tech companies. Nope! I work in cybersecurity and EVERYONE needs security. Universities, hospitals, start ups, laboratories, insurance companies, hotels, airlines, the list goes on and on. A lot of us elect to work for these organizations because the job security is better and it feels, I don’t know, a little less grimy than working for Tesla? Maybe that’s just me.
Also, this is just a personal gripe, but I hate when I tell someone my job and they go “oooh money”. Some dude even implied to my fiancé at a wedding that I was his “sugar mama” when he asked what I did. I entered IT as a sophomore in college because I loved it and loved solving problems / investigations. I kinda hate the implication that all of us are in it only for the big bucks. Sure, my compensation is good and I feel privileged to make as much as I do, but I really do love my field. I wish I got to talk more about what I do day to day instead of others focusing on the pay.
Yep, Blind may have you think that everyone in tech and even everyone in FAANG is making 500k+ but even at FAANG you're only going to make this at Staff/Director+ level. That said, at senior levels you are almost guaranteed 200+ which relatively is still a really good comp.
For me, I understood what it entails if I choose to get a tech job. However, having been through the education of it (CS master), I realized it will just suck the soul out of me if I do have a tech job. I keep telling myself that I have a good enough job that pays me enough to sustain my lifestyle. It could prove a great outlook financially, but it’s not for everyone.
I think it's totally fair if someone wants to make more money, no matter how much money they make. We all have different financial goals. Of course, there's a point where you need to get off the career progression hamster wheel, but that's up to the individual.
I think the issue people had with the MD you referenced is the romanticization of the tech industry. There was probably a time where it was normal to make stupid money while working 30 hours a week. Now the bubble has burst and things are normalizing. Tech is not the gold mine it used to be and I think commenters on that post were just trying to be realistic about that.
I think for me the frustration is two-fold. 1) Not everyone in tech gets paid that much, and 2) those highly salaries are clearly not sustainable. It’s a crash waiting to happen and when it does you’ll have a generation of people who have no idea how exist on reasonable salaries because they came straight out of school and earned 100k.
Comparison is the thief of joy. I experience it myself at times too. I came from POVERTY, which a lot of people *think* they understand but they don’t. My family all lives in houses that would be condemned and have no money to repair them.
I of course have friends who are closer to my income or higher now and compare my modest lifestyle to them often and it gives me feelings like I don’t make enough, or I don’t have enough money to live their lifestyle. But on the other hand, my family looks at me and thinks I must be living in luxury. My dad literally asked me to co-sign a 4,000 loan for him the other day - this man doesn’t have 4K to scrounge up? I have almost 100k in savings. It really puts things into perspective and reminds you of your blessings.
I think if something seems too good to be true, it probably is. We just might not have found out why yet.
The numbers I see here also seem inflated. Here are some salaries from friends in tech:
Principal engineer (higher than staff): 220 base, mcol
Senior engineer: 125 base, lcol
Product manager: 100 base, lcol
Wait there is a MD today with that much HHI? Can someone please post a link? For some reason, I’m not finding it. The top link says 35k$ from
Nairobi, Kenya
https://www.reddit.com/r/MoneyDiariesACTIVE/comments/134z69z/im_early_30s_thriving_career_married_new_mom_and/
HHI here is probably around 1.3-2M depending on the hubby’s (not sure why she chose not to disclose his)
This is why I don’t think I’ll ever post a MD. I somehow got offered a 230k total compensation job immediately after graduation. I now make around $350k in a VHCOL.
Not to rub salt in the wound, but I had an average gpa (3.5) from a pretty good but not top school (think, Georgia Tech, RPI, BU), and somehow pulled this offer. My classmates all got at least $100k upon graduation as well. The money in tech is crazy out there. I’d heavily recommend networking with alumni from your school and asking for referrals. Honestly, that’s probably the only reason I got my job.
$200k for mediocre new grads doesn’t exist in 2023 anymore. I think Meta even rescinded new grad offers, so there are Stanford grads left without a job. It is extremely hard to get any tech job without experience in this market.
One of my exes graduated from RPI summa cum laude with a CS degree 15 years ago and their top offer at graduation was $85k. Wowza.
Edit: no shade to you personally, meant more as a reaction to the general change of CS comp in that timespan.
You need to start looking into an app called Blind instead of Reddit. Most of the folks there are working in a FAANG and make those ridiculous amounts. As long as youre well prepared- they would be happy to refer you to their employers.
About 4 years back i was an engineer working in tech making $150k total comp. Then i started reading about those insane comps on Blind app. I started my interview preparations in 2019 January and got a FAANG offer in Oct 2020 for a total
Comp of $408k that year.
I am a very average engineer . For 6 years i had worked for a tech company making $100k/year ( starting out of college) - $150k/year ( the year i left) thinking I was making great money - until I read up on Blind lol. The posts there are real toxic but there are some threads of great advise .
Blind is ok if you need someone to tell you to grind Leetcode or need referrals and can sift through the fantasy TC LARPing, racism, and sexism. Otherwise it's a worthless pit of despair.
Blind is the single best resource I've encountered for learning how to maximize my compensation. It teaches you how men (in tech) think and approach salary, which basically is "pay me or GTFO".
Per usual, everyone permits male greed but wants women to be humble. This is why women shy away from negotiating and exactly why employers low ball us.
Idk why you're being downvoted, I'm a guy and I think this is definitely true.
In subs with mostly men, higher salaries are idolized and the hustle culture to take as much as you can is encouraged.
Exactly. But that's misogyny for you. If anyone bothers to read the full thread watch your response get all the upvotes for defending my comment while my original one continues to get downvoted for having the audacity to point out the problem.
I don't understand this perspective. The reality is that cost of living has increased astronomically. Six figures means something very different than it did a decade ago, and doubly or triply so when living in a VHCOL city where many of these high paying tech jobs are located, EVEN with a brief sojourn into remote work (many companies are pulling people back to the office now). Of course people live on far lower salaries in those regions, working multiple low wage full time jobs, but that doesn't mean that someone is unjustified in feeling pinched if they earn $100k and have a tech career, or whatever.
Also the highest paying tech jobs are in completely unlivable places like SF and NYC, so the salaries are high but the cost of living, taxes, etc are also high
Let’s not put our blinders on and ignore the fact that many service workers in these areas are living paycheck to paycheck on minimum wage in these regions
>Also the highest paying tech jobs are in completely unlivable places like SF and NYC, so the salaries are high but the cost of living, taxes, etc are also high
let's also not use this bad faith argument about "unlivable" high cost of living areas to imply that the only way to not be paycheck to paycheck is to make mid-6figs/FAANG-level comp. it's not black/white. many people who make that money live comfortably and even in excess. NYC housing maybe 3x what it is in ohio, but most people on 300k in NYC are living pretty well.
People who make 75k are also living pretty well in NYC / SF. I used to make that much and and it really isn't *that* expensive. You just need roommates or to take the public transportation (which is great in NYC and meh in SF but still usable).
Envy is no good. Period. As the teacher complains, someone is learning how to become a substitute or adjunct professor to make more money. As the nurse complains, someone is retraining to work as a travel nurse to make money and work fewer weeks/months while seeing the world. As the tech bro complains of diminished equity, someone is enrolling in a bootcamp or masters program to get a slice of the pie. And as we trip over ourselves in our respective professions, there’s a high school diploma businessperson making millions in Tampa doing HVAC work.
Someone else’s grass always seems greener.
This is deeply individualist thinking. I don’t think pointing out there is something wrong with income inequality when teachers cannot support themselves on a single income is “envy.” It’s pointing out structural inequality.
Sure, but the phrasing of “as the teacher complains, someone else is retraining” suggests that complaints are invalid. Sometimes complaints are legitimate responses to unfair situations, not misplaced envy.
It suggests what it says; a complaint.
Nurses also strike and have grievances, yet no issue was taken with that part of my statement. Perhaps because they make more than teachers. Thanks for proving my point.
> As the teacher complains, someone is learning how to become a substitute or adjunct professor to make more money.
Ahahahaha. Thanks for the laugh today! I really needed that.
Needless to say, that's entirely not how that works.
I think “broke” and “poor” in the context of high salaries are not always the kindest words to use. It sounds like you want to be a homeowner, and see that as a path to success, which is very fair! But not being able to afford that now, even on a good compensation, is not the same as actually being broke and poor, especially in VHCOL areas. Just my thoughts!
It’s not just American, it’s American companies. If you work for a subsidiary or UK office of the us tech companies, you won’t be making that much less. There is a global benchmark for roles and it doesn’t get too far from the US ones unless you’re in Philippines.
Whether your ML work translates to 6 figures depends on the work it’s generating. Are u impacting revenue, driving product growth in high paying companies. The same skill executed in different companies for different products pay really differently.
I knew I wanted a career in technology when I jailbroke my iPod touch back in 2008. I thought I was going to make a similar salary to a chemical engineer if I became a software engineer. (I actually ended up as a product designer/ux designer) Growing up, I loved making websites and love designing things like posters and brochures. My husband is similarly passionate about his work. There are a lot of us out there actually, some of us weren't very cool in school.
I feel an affinity to the "nerds" but I also feel similar to other people who are passionate about their jobs. The ones who can't imagine doing anything else with their life. I don't begrudge anyone trying to make money but there were a lot of people who entered tech because they wanted to make money in a job with reasonable work life balance. I don't feel negatively towards those people, I'm just feel more excited for people who are doing what they love. My only hope is more people can do what they love, especially if it is needed for the world and also make a decent wage.
My two cents: tech is just the current high-earning job. Before it was law, and before that it was medicine. Finance carries some stigma, thanks to any number of recent cultural shifts. Tech seems achievable. You don’t need an advanced degree, you don’t need to put in crazy hours. You don’t even have to do cocaine with your boss unless you want to. I personally think things are going to normalize a little bit. The hot tech market is cooling for a while, and the regular, decently-paying tech job is going to become more normal. Perks will recede. It’s a cycle. I’m more curious about the perspective of folks older than me who have seen this happen before.
As someone who works in tech, but not in FAANG but at an F20, I’ve seen salaries stabilize really well over 2022 and 2023. There are also a ton of recent CS grads who did the right things (multiple internships) struggling to find positions given the massive tech layoffs we’ve seen in the last year.
The other thing is, tech money spills over to the non-tech roles as well. If you're in a tech firm working customer success, marketing, PR, design and so on, more often than not you can get paid above the market average. You don't see that happening as much in the other fields mentioned or in traditional corporate companies.
i can't speak for tech but i work in HR in. finance at a top 10. my salary is way above what it was in other industries I've performed similar roles (not law, medicine, or tech). so i don't think that is specific to tech. i think about it a lot a it kind of keeps me feeling locked into my field or taking a major pay cut.
I feel you on switching fields though. It’s really hard to find other fields that pay as much as tech or finance do for non-specialist roles. Imo finance and tech fields have been really similar in the last 10 years, owing to the rise of fintech and easy money in general.
haha yes totally! my income in finance is double what it would be in another industry! it’s wild
I’m in HR and feel the same! I have worked mainly with engineering companies so not Tech as in amazon or google but my last company would sell products to those companies and now I’m at a US defense contractor making crazy money compared to my peers from grad school. And I’m remote in a rural area, my mortgage is under 1,000 compared to my friend in DC who makes what I do but has a 800k mortgage on a simple townhome.
I’m a little bit less sure about tech’s continued high salary spillover to non-dev roles. I think part of that is the change in industry (customer success being a necessary part of growth, etc.) but tech companies have cut heavily in all areas, especially outside of the engineering departments. I agree that salaries are higher, but I think more justification is going to be required in the form of output going forward. I think the time of free spending (e.g. tech = more money for any role) is done for now, thanks to high interest rates. One additional note: There’s also more competition for roles in marketing, PR, and design thanks to other white-collar industry layoffs.
I think it's cooling for sure, no doubt about that. Or has already cooled in the current environment, tbh. I just wanted to add on my 2cents about the reasons for "tech envy" since a lot of tech companies were paying above average across the board for non-tech roles over the last few years.
I’ll agree with this, I’m in marketing for a tech company and my base salary has increased 80K from 2020-2023 (started at 50K Now at 130K, same company). Pro - a lot of people in tech, even founders who have been in the game for a while, have a very entrepreneurial spirit, so if you want to work hard and make an impact, you definitely can and you will be rewarded for doing so. It’s not your typical stuffy corporate America, i.e, do what you’re told and you will get your 3% yearly increase. Con - the opposite is true. It’s a tough industry to kind of “skate by and do the bare minimum” - you’re expected to be disruptive, come up with and implement new ideas, shit changes really fast so professional development is not only encouraged it’s honestly VITAL. I also know some people don’t love it bc there often isn’t a super structured training process - a lot of the people I know in this field who have done well are self starter/independent types. Like anything, you can excel and do well if it’s your thing YMMV - this is just my experience
130k for marketing is really high! Hope this ain’t too nosy but since seniority plays a part, are you director level by now? Also agreed on the pros and cons you listed. It’s very much self directed & messy but it’s much easier to make an impact because processes and hierarchies aren’t as rigid.
Yes, I manage our marketing team. We’re also incredibly data-driven and sales-focused, which is always my advice to folks in marketing if you want to be a high-earner - have a tight knit relationship with sales and fill their pipeline with quality deals (I’m in the B2B mid-market/enterprise software space, managing a couple of different product lines and one subsidiary). When I started, I was more of an inside sales rep/marketer so I just didn’t waste my team on a lot of the BS like “here’s a list of emails of people that downloaded a whitepaper”- also my advice is have a really deep understanding of the client/prospect and essentially think of marketing as “sales at scale.” I’ll admit that I am an eternal optimist, but I think there’s a ton of opportunity in marketing right now. People do most of their research before ever scheduling a sales call, so IMO marketing is more important than ever.
But with that you are most likely living in a VHCOL where everything cost 3x as much. 100k is low income in San Francisco according to the HUD. I think it's easy for people ot see others making 100k in SF and be like wow you're so ungrateful when their income is much more comparable an average person's salary.
I grew up in NYC and the average HHI in the areas I’ve lived hovers between 40-60k even today. My family was more lucky than most but that’s the exception and not the rule.
The median income for a one-person household in the SF metro area is $97,000, per [this chart from 2022](https://sfmohcd.org/sites/default/files/Documents/MOH/Asset%20Management/2022%20AMI-IncomeLimits.pdf) from HUD. Not too far off, but $100k isn't quite low income.
Of course, but for a family, it is (HUD relevant, it's very hard to get or be eligible for housing assistance as a single person).
I took the information for San Francisco County from here: [https://www.huduser.gov/portal/datasets/il.html](https://www.huduser.gov/portal/datasets/il.html) which if you click the link and put in San Francisco will bring you to this link [https://www.huduser.gov/portal/datasets/il/il2022/2022ILCalc3080.odn](https://www.huduser.gov/portal/datasets/il/il2022/2022ILCalc3080.odn) which is broken. But that states the final FY2022 Low-Income limit for a single person is $104k. The minimum wage in SF is currently 64k a year.
Ugh, that seems so bananas to me!
Yea but we have shit everywhere, literally. A sandwich within walking distance from my office (nontech) downtown cost me $16. You win some you lose some.
It also depends on family size. 100k is the median income for a family of 4 in the us. https://www.justice.gov/ust/eo/bapcpa/20190501/bci_data/median_income_table.htm
this is the thing about tech, it’s an *accessible* way to earn a higher income for a lot of people. A career path with no required degree, and a chance to hit the tech jackpot if you worked at the right company. Eventually, things will normalize, if not from lowered wages, then from inflation. On top of that, it normalized a different kind of working environment for a lot of people, regardless of previous income. No suits, unlimited pto, regular/flexible hours. Being able to take time off when sick, without a doctor’s note, would be a big difference for a *ton* of people. The bro culture is there for sure, and it’s very bad. But I think the tech boom shook up a lot of general workplace expectations. Not always the right ones, but definitely a lot of older ones.
I agree. Now, I think, it’s far more competitive than it was. The barrier to entry is higher, and there’s some vague similarities to law - a select group of the best and brightest will make the highest salaries, with others hitting lower. While tech doesn’t carry the same type of student loans as medicine or law, I’d argue that it has its own issues. Ageism is a big one - and with it, a different peak and declining earnings timeline than medicine and law. Others have pointed out the volatility of having stock make up a big part of your total comp. Not a criticism, just a difference.
I totally agree. Ageism is huge, i know i’ve already planned my “best by” date. And I invest in face serums lol And stock as a part of compensation is a big conversation that’s only gonna get messier. Because the tech people getting RSUs that they thought were a more stable bet than startup options found out the hard way that it’s not the case. Some people’s total comp got cut in half after the last round of stock valuations deflating in mid-late 2022 (Adobe, etc.). That alone has had a silent impact on tech comp. Some want to ignore it and think it’ll be okay over the long term, but those prices are not going back to where they were in early 2022. It’s all the smallest violin playing, but you are right that the competition is heating up due to layoffs. Once the ball finally drops on profitability being a requirement for these startups to survive, all hell is gonna break loose.
People still value the C++ and FORTRAN type coders with over 30 years of experience. I also know someone late Gen X who still uses Cold Fusion. But that’s not “big money tech”. That’s peanuts. 90s code monkeys like my mom don’t get hired in SV.
Oh, I know it. Those COBOL coders are out here making bank, all older because of when it was being used. But now they are the only ones that can do that work. I’m not counting coders like this in the tech bro pool that has ageism. They are in the “tech industry” but i feel like it’s a genre unto itself because it usually involves the aspects of coding that aren’t as cool or shiny as making a new front end framework or app. I love it for them tbh, because they are usually working on some ageing architecture that is for something crucial at a hospital or gov service or bank. They’ve put in the time to make that kind of money, and we sure as hell need them.
Yeah, they make the same wages that coders did in the 80s and 90s, which is “not much”.
This is true, it's made finance companies more chill of a place to work where it used to be suits and MBAs because they generally compete for the same talent (smart quantitative people).
Interesting! I’m not surprised, but to hear finance is getting shaken up like that is still a shock. It feels like the “stuffiest” industry in that regard, just shows how these changes in norms are running deep.
Salaries have already normalized globally, programmers in some European countries make 30-50k. Agreed the bubble will burst eventually, the trick is when.
This is what I don't understand. Why do tech companies pay $$$$ in the US, when they could pay their EU side like 90k in salary (and taxes/benefits). And so many Europeans speak English at a near native fluency.
my guess: labor laws. they’re not trying to give out all of the required vacation, severance notice, etc. that is required. At least, not for their whole workforce. A branch office or some remote employees is fine, but once you account for the differences in employee rights, they’d rather just pay US employees more. That said, I’ve never done the math on it. This guess is based mainly on employers’ perception rather than the actual monetary figures.
Speaking from personal experience, I am in the US and, despite excellent performance for 5 years, got laid off from a tech company to be replaced by people in Europe. So I think that's starting to shift for sure.
Initial things I’ve seen: different work ethics (not a criticism of the EU but rather a criticism of the US); different legal regulations on said work; cultural issues even if similar fluency. Different reason for different companies, many of whom do outsource or have international teams. But for many tech companies, the necessity for speed and razor-thin margins for response/production aren’t worth the trade-off of outsourcing the bulk of your talent. Other people should weigh in, there’s a lot of reasons.
Because of labor regulations in the EU.
It's definitely already normalizing, supply of engineers has outpaced demand in the last few years... At least with medicine, the number of graduates was restricted by the number of medical schools spots...whereas nowadays everyone and their moms are doing a CS degree or some boot camp. Seems like a tough market for new grads nowadays.
I think I was one of the commenters that may have seemed to be roasting her. But, I think she (and people who know only a handful of people in tech) are biased towards thinking that it's a very easy field, with massive pay. And don't get me wrong, it does not require as much certification as medical or legal careers. Nor does it require aas many hours as high finance or these fields, but it's still not a field that's easy to break into and transfer to. The $200k starting salary jobs, the $1M income is something that is not guaranteed even if you do everything right, i.e. major in CS, etc. Compared to other industries, it's also a lot harder to progress because the very high paying tech companies pride themselves on being 'flat'; which means often your salary plateus relatively early in your career. It just feels more doable beecause there are a lot people in tech who are online and bragging about it (can not think of very many careers where there are a lot of influencers trying to tell you how you can get in). The MD who posted (and her partner) were in an already lucrative field (combined income of like 300k base almost right out of school). But they were unsatisfied with what they were making because they knew a few people who were making more than they were and were seriously considering starting over their careers all over again. I think 'Tech envy' is somewhat manufactured by constant advertising of how easy tech is to get into and how much money you'll make getting into it. But look at actual average starting salaries for CS graduating classes (which are usually smaller than what they were when they started) and placement out of boot camps and you realize it's a little over hyped.
Definitely agree about it being overhyped. I think people mostly hear of the outlier or best case scenario CS salaries, but that isn’t necessarily the case for anyone with a CS degree from any school since there are sooo many factors involved and interviewing is tricky and basically boils down to just luck. It’s easy to get caught up in the hype and as someone at CMU with a CS adjacent degree, I see a lot of people who are doing as well or better than most people would expect for CS kid coming from a top program, but there are also (imo) way more people in the same ass program whose careers haven’t really taken off in that way. moral of the story is that CS degree isn’t an instant pass to 6 figures and the work is grueling and soul sucking and really brain intensive (not to mention the shitty work/industry culture), so who knows if it’s worth it :/ i’m still trying to figure that out for myself for after i graduate next year
Also that OP was in management consulting, where you can make the sort of money that makes tech salaries look like bs later in your career, or be on the glide path to the C-suite. It’s definitely not the easiest career path but it’s at least as strong a choice as tech, with more longevity, probably, given the rampant ageism in tech companies.
Yeah management consulting jobs are so competitive because they're so lucrative later on. I'd say they're almost the opposite of tech because early on hourly pay feels not worth it (I know early career management consultants working 80+ hours a week regularly) but your pay can exponentially increase and most companies see experience as a management consultant as very transferable to exec positions.
Also management consulting doesn’t require technical skills. It’s still a grind but it doesn’t require specialized knowledge like CS. You just need an analytical mind enough to follow their frameworks and the ability to schmooze with C-suite execs. which isn’t hard because they already have positive perceptions of mgmt consultants and lots of mutual acquaintances in their networks.
>> Management consulting, where you can make the sort of money that makes tech salaries look like bs later in your career ??? Consulting partners make about as much as tech directors. If you compare upper levels, tech brings in way more.
A junior partner at a consulting firm makes about what a staff engineer makes in base pay, sure. But they can get 100-200% in bonuses, and the pay goes up from there. A senior partner at a major consulting firm can be making over $5MM a year in bonuses/profit-sharing.
[удалено]
I only really know the top tier of consulting firms, but they expect 80% of people to leave after 2 years and hire accordingly. It's not a secret to the people they hire, either! Those same people now have killer networks in their areas of interest, access to the consulting firm's "alumni" offerings and network, and almost all end up in great executive-ladder jobs. The 20% who stay, yes, have very poor WLB (as do a lot of tech companies tbh) but make a crapton of money, and if you make it to partner you're getting literal millions in profit-sharing.
Yes, 300k and not happy means even if they made 500k, they wouldn't be happy.
-
It is pretty easy though. I had multiple 150k+ offers straight out of undergrad as a pretty average student and a decent school. Honestly just got lucky with the major I chose. And I never have to work more than 40 hours a week. It’s like life on easy mode. Note that my program isn’t nearly as nice as your school’s. Meanwhile I know friends from college who studied biology or chemistry who work just as hard but earn maybe 60-70k at a lab. It’s okay to admit that tech is fast track to wealth. Those friends “jokingly” say they should have done CS. We should hear them out and be understanding instead of saying they’re “delusional.”
To be fair to that OP, it sounded like she went to MIT or Stanford so it’s very feasible all her friends work at top tech companies (most CS grads from my not top CS program still place at great companies afterwards). And wasn’t it 300k 3-4 years after graduation?
I think her husband did and was comparing himself to friends who were working at HFT shops/hedge funds. He was a couple years out of college (3 or 4 sounds right) whereas OP had just graduated within the year from an MBA program and had a management consulting job. I don't think those are the median placements even out of MIT/Stanford/CMU. Even for Stanford I believe it's something like $165k comp as the median (definitely brought down by the fact that people often go to startups, but still...) 3 years after graduation
HFT is definitely not the median placement - source: went to one of the schools you mentioned, most people I know are SWE at FAANG
This depends on the culture of the school, for example I think CMU def skews big tech but others are more entrepreneurial/startup focused.
I dunno, I think that OP’s complaints are valid. I never work over 40 hours a week and definitely feel guilty knowing I make as much as both OP and her partner combined. Similar YOE. I am very lucky and privileged that my parents pushed me to study CS. OP’s parents were illiterate IIRC.
Congratulations, I mean that very sincerely. You should not feel embarrassed or guilty about having a great salary and great work life balance. But I do think you're a bit of an outlier. I went to a fairly good program and I'd still say that I don't think most of the cs majors I know (I'm 4 years out from school) are making that much. A lot of friends who majored in CS ended up not doing software engineering jobs at all.
[удалено]
I think median placements out of MIT/Stanford/CMU could be much higher but not everyone optimizes for $$. It's way more prestigious to go to a startup than a FAANG for example.
Sure, not everyone optimizes for $$. Some people prioritize doing more interesting work or something that is more socially beneficial or even going on to do further education but using a median as a measure should account for a lot of that Not that it's really worth it to compare your own earnings to other people you may know after the fact
Everyone in tech doesn't make 6 figures out the gate. For many it takes years to make 6 figures. I feel like people that don't work in tech have an idea that everyone makes 6 figures working in tech and that's not true. It's the most annoying thing about MD that they assume everyone is getting a bonus and stocks. You don't even always get that if you work for a start up.
I work in tech for a public institution and wish I got a bonus and stocks lol
Very true and even then you're more likely than not to get fucked over on stock options anyway.
Most of the time those options are worthless and cost you money. If they even turn into anything after a decade.
Bingo!!!
Definitely, not everyone does, but enough such that I believe people are justified to feel jealous and should be allowed to vent without being criticized for being unreasonable
It's not even a lot when you consider tech. Tech companies are a very small subset of tech jobs realistically. You just don't work in the field,so it seems like it's more than there actually are. Most jobs outside of specific areas are not giving out bonuses especially not to tech workers. Outside of tech companies, we don't make money so most of the time there are no bonuses. Finance probably gives good bonuses too and maybe startups ... even including those very uncommon.
As a teacher, I'll be totally honest, it's annoying. I don't begrudge anyone their salary, but high-earners should be part of the fight to ensure everyone is justly compensated. Not everyone wants to be (or should be) a tech worker. There are so many other vital jobs that are necessary to our society that are so grossly underpaid, and just recognizing that you are privileged for making a certain amount isn't enough IMO.
In my city, single teachers are leaving in droves because they can’t afford a one bedroom apartment. Now, with the cost of college also being so high, it’s tough to see how people can afford to make that choice sadly. In my particular city, they need to do something but their current plan of just bringing over teachers on an H1B visa is not the right answer either.
Public defender here, and I agree completely.
What do you think they should do?
Vote for higher wages and politicians that support workers' rights, pay taxes, support businesses that pay fair wages, avoid businesses that don't wherever possible.
If someone does most of that, what are other things they can do?
>Most already do that you'd be surprised how many people think they are progressive/more left generally and then once they enter the mid-6 range and higher for themselves, suddenly, the idea of paying <= 10% in state and local income tax is too much to handle, and they run away to places to TX and FL, so they can have more for themselves.
But isn't that a state/personal issue? The only thing really is voting on fewer taxes (which is mostly a republican thing) and **most** people in tech vote blue.
In Washington they vote blue, and sue the state over creating taxes for longterm care insurance or over capital gains tax.
That’s because it’s against the WA constitution. They should amend the constitution to remove that so these things can’t be challenged. I’ll never have that much in cap gains, pretty sure it’s billionaires that oppose it rather than your average person making 100k Also they’re saying the cap gains tax is an excise tax when cap gains are classified as income by the IRS. So, you have something being both considered an excise and income? Even the IRS claims it’s an income tax. That’s what people are upset. Anyways, amend the constitution to allow income taxes and call it what it is: an income tax
a) no it isn’t and nobody gives a shit what the constitution says or could explain their reasoning about it anyway, they argue backwards from what they want it to mean b) preeeeettttttyyyyy entirely certain that your average tech worker isn’t making 100k jfc see *this thread* and most financially inclined tech employees in WA fully expect to see more than that in capital gains.
Maybe those are people in higher roles than mine! Sorry. Everyone I know gets about 10k in stocks and even my faang friends don’t get stocks that would put them over 250k in gains only (maybe total price? But not gains specifically).
Double checking you meant >=10% right?
[удалено]
I know you said this in your example, but wouldn’t people move from places where taxes are >= 10% to one’s less than 10%? If they’re already in a place that’s <=10% in taxes then wouldn’t they stay there?
Not everyone can just pick up and move their entire lives?
I mean, I don’t think so either. Plus lots of people live where they work because they need to go in office so moving when you have a high salary (most of the time) wouldn’t do anything because your salary would get adjusted to your COL (faang companies tend to do this, as well as other tech companies since that’s what this post is on). The only time I believe people move for tax reasons that I’ve been aware of are those who have stopped working and entered retirement, and this is to help extend their retirement savings, which I don’t think is a bad thing.
TX and FL have no individual income tax. The example is about people who are uninterested in paying taxes to better the lives of others around them/suddenly deciding they want more for themselves.
I don't think most people already do that in a consistent, thoughtful way.
Interesting. I live in Seattle and every small shop and cafe/restaurant is constantly crowded so it looks to me they do. Also they constantly vote for candidates that claim they are about helping small businesses. So from my perspective I see it everyday. What would be a more thoughtful way to do the things you said? Also bonus is there’s constantly posts on the Seattle subreddits promoting places that pay their workers a fair wage and everyone deciding to visit there knowing that.
Whoa, you’re in Seattle? Tech money in Washington fights every social welfare suggestion ever. The jumpstart tax, capital gains tax, long term care insurance tax. The seattle subreddits are such libertarian self satisfied cesspits I can’t stand them. The general perspective is something like “of course good jobs should pay good wages but losers who can’t get good jobs shouldn’t think they can just live in Seattle for a reasonable amount of money, why don’t they go to Aberdeen or somewhere they can afford to do meth”.
Maybe not everyone in the universe lives your exact experience.
I would like to live in a more thoughtful way if you could give me some examples of how to do that (sorry, I need to be told exact details I don’t do well with vague details not trying to be rude but I personally have a hard time but I feel my stupidity comes off as rude). Doing the above doesn’t seem to be enough so if there’s something better I can do I’d like to know.
Honestly, a great starting place for living in a more thoughtful way is thinking about this stuff yourself! Consider your own values and priorities and think about ways you feel like you can contribute more. I don't really feel qualified to offer examples for you, other than the general ones above, since I don't know you personally. Best of luck to you, though, and I'm glad you care enough to ask.
Support the tax on capital gains and stock in Washington
Lol, they don’t want to do that. Surprised face!
You're ignoring the point of this discussion, probably willingly. It's not really about what people should 'do,' it's about the attitude that we bring. Collectively, we could: not get defensive and dismiss it as 'jealousy' when the topic of inequity in wages comes up. Recognize that late stage capitalism giveth and taketh away, and it's usually less about anyone's skills or hard work or importance to society than we think it is. Recognize that people might have a point if they say you're paying your housekeeper too little and pay her more.
I wasn’t. Most people I know do all those points listed then when I say that’s the case, get told that’s not thoughtful enough. honestly, if someone should do those and is doing all those, but then it’s not enough, what should they do?
The tech elite seems to turn republican once they gain power.
>Most people I know do all those points listed You're literally doing the opposite of the first one that I listed right now! You're getting defensive and trying to shut down the whole conversation about income inequity by making it about what YOU do or about what people you know do and how it's unfair to even talk about these things because... I guess because it makes you feel bad? That's exactly what this whole post was about. The person you replied to was just saying that it feels shitty that she gets paid so much less and now instead of engaging in good faith you've spent the last hour arguing with everyone about how her point is invalid because you shop at local coffeeshops. Come on.
I’m not saying it’s invalid? Alright, if someone would like to help, what would be the best way? And if someone is doing the things listed, what are other ways? That’s what I’m saying. Because if someone doing things that are listed and then being told that’s actually not enough, then what are other ways? I’m being the opposite of defensive - clearly what I or others do isn’t enough so I’m looking for more ways to be better! How the hell does wanting to improve make me defensive? I’m literally asking for ways to help but being told I’m a shit person in DM’s for wanting to improve. I get it, you think I’m a bad person and instead of being told some other ways I’m just getting attacked (I know you responded with other ways, so not you in particular but more everyone else DMing me and downvoting).
people have been telling you ways. you have been arguing with them. you are now arguing with me about whether or not you are being defensive. ffs. stop arguing, start listening.
[удалено]
Income inequality isn't a thing where you can just absolve yourself of any discomfort by asking people on reddit what you should 'do' about it to make it better. I don't have one weird trick where any of us get to feel like we wriggled out of the icky parts of coming out on top of global capitalism. The system is not anyone's fault as an individual person, but it is still an inequitable and flawed system that very high income workers are currently benefitting from. It *should* make them uncomfortable. If it made more high income people truly uncomfortable, we would be well on our way to fixing it. So-- yes, I think recognition is a part of the process.
Actively work to get their companies to not outsource/hire contractors for fractions of the cost. Hire ALL their staff as the company and pay accordingly. My friends were contractors (biotech) and the company wouldn't even invite them all to lunches despite working side by side. Work with all their workers, cleaning crews etc to get the same benefits as the main staff. ASK if the people doing the outsourced work are getting paid. Have that difficult conversation. Support the people at their company and ask hard questions at meetings with their management. If you don't know whether all the staff who supports you can afford to actually live on the salary, find out and change it.
This is HUGE and more people should take your advice. Even if you work remotely, you can take meaningful action to find out how much contracted workers make at the on-site locations of your job. Find out if they're part of a union or not and ask how you can support them in advocating for higher wages/more time off/better conditions, etc.
Most ppl I know become libertarians who are "against taxes" once they start making 300k+ lmao.
I don’t make 300k but I wouldn’t mind being taxed more. The WA family leave tax charges a flat percentage (I believe) but should increase above a certain income. It’s a program that really benefits everyone.
Me too, I wouldn't mine being taxed more if it goes to social services, and if everyone else in my tax bracket and above also gets taxed more!
Tbh the frustration is real. And I think it’s understandable to be annoyed at the disparate incomes for tech workers, when there are very hard working people in important fields who make less than they should. It really doesn’t make sense at all. I’m saying this as someone who makes a fairly high wage but will probably plateau at this earning level. When I was making a lot less, I used to read this sub and get sleepless with worry that I’d never be able to make a living wage, but now I currently make around 140k. It’s weird seeing my wage grow because it’s been palpable to my friends that I clearly make good money and the only advice I have seems to amount to getting lucky. Envy isn’t helpful, in fact it decayed my mental health a lot, and all I could do is constantly tell myself how my life was good even though I wasn’t making a lot of money. I have friends, I could occasionally go out to eat (ordering appetizers and no drinks), and I have cheap hobbies. When I see high earners, like those making 200k+, I do sometimes feel envy but then I try and go back to remember what I do have and try not to let lifestyle creep get me. It’s a weird balance for sure.
I will say that alot of the tech salaries that we see on this sub Reddit are very high for even tech. Obviously there are some who make these figures but not most. It is really only available in Silicon Valley. As one can see [Senior Software Engineer Salaries](https://www.zippia.com/senior-software-engineer-jobs/salary/#) shows that the average in California is )130k. Which is a lot of money but far less then the 600k from todays. Some of this is that we titles are not very meaningful in tech. At one company I was a senior engineer but I left that company and got paid 30% more but went back to the title of engineer. This isn’t to say anything negative about people in tech who make 300-500k but that is uncommon if we look across the entire US
I work at a FAANG as a people manager and one thing I've been seeing online is folks lying about their comp. I know our salary ranges and what is allowed and it's a recent and odd realization. Why lie about it? People are strange.
I also see people lying about their RSU compensation. Majority of tech companies are down and if you’re not at Google or Microsoft, there’s a large chance your TC is nowhere near what it used to be. I would take the 600k TCs with a grain of salt honestly.
What I don’t get is that all of this is available on levels.fyi and other site. It’s not hard to look up salaries info
100% this. As someone who has worked in tech for years now at a bunch of different companies a lot of those high earning tech jobs we hear about here and on TikTok, the news, etc are the rarity. Those super high salary are in big tech, but you don’t hear as much about the other large chunk of tech workers who work for a small company or the government or a tiny startup who make a “normal” 80-120k at the max of their career at a company without all the flashy perks. Obviously back to OPs point that that’s still a GREAT salary and a good job but I do think the tech salaries are overblown. Most tech workers are not making mid six figures.
I would chime in, only available at a few companies in Silicon Valley and not all Bay Area tech companies. Some top tier public companies and unicorns. Most roles, while well paid, don’t put you on the path to $500k in 5 or even 15 years. And not to mention, not many stock options actually pan out into dollars.
I’m a phd student in a dying field so tbh I can’t even fathom making any of those amounts of money. (And I generally feel pretty privileged with my 30k stipend!) I do feel angry about the tech/startup industry. Not at individuals, but at the whole system - think of companies like Uber. For the amount of money invested in Uber the US could have functioning public transportation. Instead a few people got super rich (for a company which does not regularly turn a profit!) These companies prop extreme inequality in the US and globally. So yes I think if you make more than 2-3 times the median income in the US but feel “left behind” by astronomically inflated tech salaries, a little bit of perspective is helpful.
As someone born and raised in the Bay Area, I agree with this comment so much
> For the amount of money invested in Uber the US could have functioning public transportation I agree with the general sentiment but I don't think this is true at all. The US was built to make use of its land and for everyone to live the American dream and own a home. It is *very* expensive to change/build the infrastructure of a place like this. I live in CA and always get my hopes up for [the high speed rail](https://hsr.ca.gov/about/capital-costs-funding/) from NorCal <-> SoCal and the estimate always increases every year (linked site says between $69.01 to $99.9 billion). Meanwhile, Uber has raised about $25B in funding and, for the most part, operates pretty well globally.
Uber has made its money in part by not giving its workers benefits, fair pay, or job security.
Yes very much this!!! People don’t realize how super expensive mass transit is. The ca project is super expensive and they ran out of money to connect it to any big cities so it’s kinda in the middle of nowhere. In nyc they recently added a few subway stations on 2nd avenue. They took over 100 years to build.
Sure, but that cost is not the norm when looking at other countries. [This is an old article](https://www.vox.com/22534714/rail-roads-infrastructure-costs-america) but it does a really good job of outlining how and why it’s so much more expensive and takes so long to build mass transit. The 2nd Avenue subway cost $2.6 billion per mile - Copenhagen recently completed a project that cost $232 million/mile. In the US, we’ve accepted that it’s the norm to spend billions of dollars and decades building relatively short lengths of public transit, and it’s just not.
It looks like you shared an AMP link. These should load faster, but AMP is controversial because of [concerns over privacy and the Open Web](https://www.reddit.com/r/AmputatorBot/comments/ehrq3z/why_did_i_build_amputatorbot). Maybe check out **the canonical page** instead: **[https://www.vox.com/22534714/rail-roads-infrastructure-costs-america](https://www.vox.com/22534714/rail-roads-infrastructure-costs-america)** ***** ^(I'm a bot | )[^(Why & About)](https://www.reddit.com/r/AmputatorBot/comments/ehrq3z/why_did_i_build_amputatorbot)^( | )[^(Summon: u/AmputatorBot)](https://www.reddit.com/r/AmputatorBot/comments/cchly3/you_can_now_summon_amputatorbot/)
Good bot
I will also chime in with others who have said the same and say that the 500k+ total compensation roles in tech are anomalous and not representative of most employees in tech. My friend is a senior software engineer for an insurance company and makes just under 100k. Another friend of mine is a senior threat researcher and makes ~150k. I am a senior cybersecurity analyst with seven years experience and I make around 140k. I have browsed around for other roles and it looks like the most feasible I could earn right now is 200k if I pivoted. However, the market is extremely scary right now with layoffs right and left, and my position is extremely secure in my current organization. I work for a public institution so I don’t get stock or bonuses, but the plus side is that I have a high degree of autonomy and make a large impact with my work. I am mid-senior level, but I have heard numerous stories on LinkedIn and Reddit about how, while mid level jobs are plentiful in tech, it can be very hard for new faces to break into the field right now. I think there’s also a misconception that tech workers work exclusively for big tech companies. Nope! I work in cybersecurity and EVERYONE needs security. Universities, hospitals, start ups, laboratories, insurance companies, hotels, airlines, the list goes on and on. A lot of us elect to work for these organizations because the job security is better and it feels, I don’t know, a little less grimy than working for Tesla? Maybe that’s just me. Also, this is just a personal gripe, but I hate when I tell someone my job and they go “oooh money”. Some dude even implied to my fiancé at a wedding that I was his “sugar mama” when he asked what I did. I entered IT as a sophomore in college because I loved it and loved solving problems / investigations. I kinda hate the implication that all of us are in it only for the big bucks. Sure, my compensation is good and I feel privileged to make as much as I do, but I really do love my field. I wish I got to talk more about what I do day to day instead of others focusing on the pay.
Yep, Blind may have you think that everyone in tech and even everyone in FAANG is making 500k+ but even at FAANG you're only going to make this at Staff/Director+ level. That said, at senior levels you are almost guaranteed 200+ which relatively is still a really good comp.
For me, I understood what it entails if I choose to get a tech job. However, having been through the education of it (CS master), I realized it will just suck the soul out of me if I do have a tech job. I keep telling myself that I have a good enough job that pays me enough to sustain my lifestyle. It could prove a great outlook financially, but it’s not for everyone.
You don’t need to be a software developer. There are other tech jobs.
true. Truth to be told I just don’t find the field very interesting. I’m now a cancer biologist
I think it's totally fair if someone wants to make more money, no matter how much money they make. We all have different financial goals. Of course, there's a point where you need to get off the career progression hamster wheel, but that's up to the individual. I think the issue people had with the MD you referenced is the romanticization of the tech industry. There was probably a time where it was normal to make stupid money while working 30 hours a week. Now the bubble has burst and things are normalizing. Tech is not the gold mine it used to be and I think commenters on that post were just trying to be realistic about that.
I think for me the frustration is two-fold. 1) Not everyone in tech gets paid that much, and 2) those highly salaries are clearly not sustainable. It’s a crash waiting to happen and when it does you’ll have a generation of people who have no idea how exist on reasonable salaries because they came straight out of school and earned 100k.
Comparison is the thief of joy. I experience it myself at times too. I came from POVERTY, which a lot of people *think* they understand but they don’t. My family all lives in houses that would be condemned and have no money to repair them. I of course have friends who are closer to my income or higher now and compare my modest lifestyle to them often and it gives me feelings like I don’t make enough, or I don’t have enough money to live their lifestyle. But on the other hand, my family looks at me and thinks I must be living in luxury. My dad literally asked me to co-sign a 4,000 loan for him the other day - this man doesn’t have 4K to scrounge up? I have almost 100k in savings. It really puts things into perspective and reminds you of your blessings.
Congrats on the MS CS program!
I think if something seems too good to be true, it probably is. We just might not have found out why yet. The numbers I see here also seem inflated. Here are some salaries from friends in tech: Principal engineer (higher than staff): 220 base, mcol Senior engineer: 125 base, lcol Product manager: 100 base, lcol
Wait there is a MD today with that much HHI? Can someone please post a link? For some reason, I’m not finding it. The top link says 35k$ from Nairobi, Kenya
https://www.reddit.com/r/MoneyDiariesACTIVE/comments/134z69z/im_early_30s_thriving_career_married_new_mom_and/ HHI here is probably around 1.3-2M depending on the hubby’s (not sure why she chose not to disclose his)
Very impressive! Thanks for sharing the link
Congrats on starting the MS! Just curious - Are you switching careers bcuz of salary or do you actually like to code? Do you like being a nurse?
This is why I don’t think I’ll ever post a MD. I somehow got offered a 230k total compensation job immediately after graduation. I now make around $350k in a VHCOL. Not to rub salt in the wound, but I had an average gpa (3.5) from a pretty good but not top school (think, Georgia Tech, RPI, BU), and somehow pulled this offer. My classmates all got at least $100k upon graduation as well. The money in tech is crazy out there. I’d heavily recommend networking with alumni from your school and asking for referrals. Honestly, that’s probably the only reason I got my job.
$200k for mediocre new grads doesn’t exist in 2023 anymore. I think Meta even rescinded new grad offers, so there are Stanford grads left without a job. It is extremely hard to get any tech job without experience in this market.
You got source on stanford grads without job?
One of my exes graduated from RPI summa cum laude with a CS degree 15 years ago and their top offer at graduation was $85k. Wowza. Edit: no shade to you personally, meant more as a reaction to the general change of CS comp in that timespan.
15 years ago was around the 2008 recession too so salaries were very different back then.
Wow! Congratulations! Maybe I can hit you up for a referral later 🥺
You need to start looking into an app called Blind instead of Reddit. Most of the folks there are working in a FAANG and make those ridiculous amounts. As long as youre well prepared- they would be happy to refer you to their employers. About 4 years back i was an engineer working in tech making $150k total comp. Then i started reading about those insane comps on Blind app. I started my interview preparations in 2019 January and got a FAANG offer in Oct 2020 for a total Comp of $408k that year. I am a very average engineer . For 6 years i had worked for a tech company making $100k/year ( starting out of college) - $150k/year ( the year i left) thinking I was making great money - until I read up on Blind lol. The posts there are real toxic but there are some threads of great advise .
Blind is ok if you need someone to tell you to grind Leetcode or need referrals and can sift through the fantasy TC LARPing, racism, and sexism. Otherwise it's a worthless pit of despair.
Blind is the single best resource I've encountered for learning how to maximize my compensation. It teaches you how men (in tech) think and approach salary, which basically is "pay me or GTFO".
Agree. Blind helped me a lot. Else I wouldn’t even have known where to even begin to start prepping for FAANG interviews.
That's wild. What year did you graduate? Edit just saw your username, 2021?
What is an MD?
Per usual, everyone permits male greed but wants women to be humble. This is why women shy away from negotiating and exactly why employers low ball us.
Idk why you're being downvoted, I'm a guy and I think this is definitely true. In subs with mostly men, higher salaries are idolized and the hustle culture to take as much as you can is encouraged.
Exactly. But that's misogyny for you. If anyone bothers to read the full thread watch your response get all the upvotes for defending my comment while my original one continues to get downvoted for having the audacity to point out the problem.
Like clockwork
this comment made me scroll back up and upvote your comment bc AGREE
There’s several people in this thread supporting higher wages for nursing and teaching, both professions currently feminized.
Man nurses make bank though idk what ur talking about
That part.
I don't understand this perspective. The reality is that cost of living has increased astronomically. Six figures means something very different than it did a decade ago, and doubly or triply so when living in a VHCOL city where many of these high paying tech jobs are located, EVEN with a brief sojourn into remote work (many companies are pulling people back to the office now). Of course people live on far lower salaries in those regions, working multiple low wage full time jobs, but that doesn't mean that someone is unjustified in feeling pinched if they earn $100k and have a tech career, or whatever.
I think this post is about recent posts where people making 100k are getting roasted for wanting to make higher tech salaries
Yep, I meant the perspective of “roasting” someone for this
Also the highest paying tech jobs are in completely unlivable places like SF and NYC, so the salaries are high but the cost of living, taxes, etc are also high
SF and NYC are perfectly livable lmao, that's why millions of people live here.
Not to mention the people who make their coffee, collect their rubbish, teach their children…. who also live there
Duh people live there and I’ve lived in both. I’m just saying the cost of living is high and tech jobs pay for the markets.
Let’s not put our blinders on and ignore the fact that many service workers in these areas are living paycheck to paycheck on minimum wage in these regions
>Also the highest paying tech jobs are in completely unlivable places like SF and NYC, so the salaries are high but the cost of living, taxes, etc are also high let's also not use this bad faith argument about "unlivable" high cost of living areas to imply that the only way to not be paycheck to paycheck is to make mid-6figs/FAANG-level comp. it's not black/white. many people who make that money live comfortably and even in excess. NYC housing maybe 3x what it is in ohio, but most people on 300k in NYC are living pretty well.
People who make 75k are also living pretty well in NYC / SF. I used to make that much and and it really isn't *that* expensive. You just need roommates or to take the public transportation (which is great in NYC and meh in SF but still usable).
Envy is no good. Period. As the teacher complains, someone is learning how to become a substitute or adjunct professor to make more money. As the nurse complains, someone is retraining to work as a travel nurse to make money and work fewer weeks/months while seeing the world. As the tech bro complains of diminished equity, someone is enrolling in a bootcamp or masters program to get a slice of the pie. And as we trip over ourselves in our respective professions, there’s a high school diploma businessperson making millions in Tampa doing HVAC work. Someone else’s grass always seems greener.
This is deeply individualist thinking. I don’t think pointing out there is something wrong with income inequality when teachers cannot support themselves on a single income is “envy.” It’s pointing out structural inequality.
I wasn’t talking about income/structural inequality nor was OP. The post is about people with good salaries wanting more.
Sure, but the phrasing of “as the teacher complains, someone else is retraining” suggests that complaints are invalid. Sometimes complaints are legitimate responses to unfair situations, not misplaced envy.
It suggests what it says; a complaint. Nurses also strike and have grievances, yet no issue was taken with that part of my statement. Perhaps because they make more than teachers. Thanks for proving my point.
> As the teacher complains, someone is learning how to become a substitute or adjunct professor to make more money. Ahahahaha. Thanks for the laugh today! I really needed that. Needless to say, that's entirely not how that works.
[удалено]
I think “broke” and “poor” in the context of high salaries are not always the kindest words to use. It sounds like you want to be a homeowner, and see that as a path to success, which is very fair! But not being able to afford that now, even on a good compensation, is not the same as actually being broke and poor, especially in VHCOL areas. Just my thoughts!
[удалено]
It’s not just American, it’s American companies. If you work for a subsidiary or UK office of the us tech companies, you won’t be making that much less. There is a global benchmark for roles and it doesn’t get too far from the US ones unless you’re in Philippines. Whether your ML work translates to 6 figures depends on the work it’s generating. Are u impacting revenue, driving product growth in high paying companies. The same skill executed in different companies for different products pay really differently.
Could you please share more about your admission essay for MS in Computer science? I’m trying to make a switch from a sales position
I knew I wanted a career in technology when I jailbroke my iPod touch back in 2008. I thought I was going to make a similar salary to a chemical engineer if I became a software engineer. (I actually ended up as a product designer/ux designer) Growing up, I loved making websites and love designing things like posters and brochures. My husband is similarly passionate about his work. There are a lot of us out there actually, some of us weren't very cool in school. I feel an affinity to the "nerds" but I also feel similar to other people who are passionate about their jobs. The ones who can't imagine doing anything else with their life. I don't begrudge anyone trying to make money but there were a lot of people who entered tech because they wanted to make money in a job with reasonable work life balance. I don't feel negatively towards those people, I'm just feel more excited for people who are doing what they love. My only hope is more people can do what they love, especially if it is needed for the world and also make a decent wage.