Slashdot Mirror


If Tech Is So Important, Why Are IT Wages Flat?

dcblogs writes "Despite the fact that technology plays an increasingly important role in the economy, IT wages remain persistently flat. This may be tech's inconvenient truth. In 2000, the average hourly wage was $37.27 in computer and math occupations for workers with at least a bachelor's degree. In 2011, it was $39.24, adjusted for inflation, according to a new report by the Economic Policy Institute. That translates to an average wage increase of less than a half percent a year. In real terms, IT wages overall have gone up by $1.97 an hour in just over 10 years, according to the EPI. Data from professional staffing firm Yoh shows wages in decline. In its latest measure for week 12 of 2012, the hourly wages were $31.45 and in 2010, for the same week, at $31.78. The worker who earned $31.78 in 2010 would need to make $33.71 today to stay even with inflation. Wages vary by skill and this data is broad. The unemployment rate for tech has been in the 3-4% range, but EPI says full employment has been historically around 2%."

660 comments

  1. tech is a fairly broad category by Trepidity · · Score: 4, Interesting

    If you're a competent programmer and live in the SF Bay Area, wages are definitely not flat, to the point of absurdity. There are kids just coming out of college making $80k or more as a starting salary, and quickly rising up to $120k+ within only a few years of experience.

    1. Re:tech is a fairly broad category by Zeromous · · Score: 4, Insightful

      In my area (not US) if your skills have flattened so has your salary. If you grow and expand your abilties, there is plenty of room for growth.

      BTW 80k to start in SF seems pretty horrible considering the cost of living there I dont find it surprising to command 6 figures after proving oneself.

      --
      ---Up Up Down Down Left Right Left Right B A START
    2. Re:tech is a fairly broad category by Microlith · · Score: 0

      But if you're going to live in the Bay Area for several years, you'd better be earning 80K out of the gate and move up, just because the cost of living is so high. I started out at 60k and am up a lot higher up in the Sacramento region.

      That said, I think the topic here is much more applicable: all wages are flat or declining, and it's been happening for the past 30 years as most of the gains in productivity have been trapped by the richest in the country.

    3. Re:tech is a fairly broad category by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      True, but you have to account for cost of living, which is much higher in SF compared to other places.

    4. Re:tech is a fairly broad category by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Welcome to California. The salary/cost of living ratio does not translate directly from other areas. Most people take a hit in standard of living to be there.

    5. Re:tech is a fairly broad category by BlueRaja · · Score: 1

      spoken like someone who has clearly never lived anywhere else...

    6. Re:tech is a fairly broad category by TheViffer · · Score: 2

      Absurdity is better defined working for a SF Bay Area company but living in in the midwest .. just saying :-)

      --
      -- Knowing too much can get you killed, but knowing who knows too much can make you rich.
    7. Re:tech is a fairly broad category by emt377 · · Score: 2

      If you're a competent programmer and live in the SF Bay Area, wages are definitely not flat, to the point of absurdity. There are kids just coming out of college making $80k or more as a starting salary, and quickly rising up to $120k+ within only a few years of experience.

      If you're a competent programmer in the Bay Area you work in product development, not IT.

    8. Re:tech is a fairly broad category by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      I've lived in three different states. California's cost of living is just plain irrational for the average incomes there.

    9. Re:tech is a fairly broad category by Trepidity · · Score: 4, Interesting

      I hear this a lot, but as someone who lived a good life for a few years in the Bay Area on a grad-student stipend, I don't really believe it, at least if you don't have kids. I don't understand how single people could make $80k and feel they can't handle the cost of living, unless it's due to social factors (all their friends make more, so they're spending a shit-ton of money on bars, restaurants, and other entertainment).

    10. Re:tech is a fairly broad category by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      80k as a starting salary in SF is pretty low for a capable developer from a decent school right out of college. Boston has lower cost of living compared to SF and entry level developers wouldn't make much less than that.

    11. Re:tech is a fairly broad category by Darinbob · · Score: 0

      Also, "IT" is not necessarily "tech". IT is about services, keeping the computers running but they don't actually build or design the computers, and very rarely they help with web sites (the low tech side of technology).

      Wages are flat becuase first of IT workers are a dime a dozen. Everyone who has a two dollar certificate tries to get into IT. IT workers are interchangeable cogs used for grunt labor, so the wages are the lowest they can be and get away with it. However even if you step up from IT into actual technology and engineering, wages are flat (but high) in the Bay Area because companies need to be competitive, they can't afford to keep raising salaries just because of cost of living because they have to compete with companies elsewhere in the US. So what happens instead is that there's a relatively higher entry level salary that flattens out sooner than less expensive areas.

      Given that most of the "silicon" has left the area to be replaced by media and content, and too many upstarts are now claiming to be part of the "valley", I think the remaining high tech may move on eventually. Really the only advantage left is if you have a home here you don't have to relocate if you lose your job though you may have to lower your standards.

    12. Re:tech is a fairly broad category by Narcocide · · Score: 0

      No its not completely irrational; the income+cost of parking differential does generally serve to keep the riffraff out of the nicer areas of town.

    13. Re:tech is a fairly broad category by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      My little sister went from a house with a yard in Texas to a quarter of a loft in San Francisco.

      She says she'd do it again. Something about having actual culture that isn't about the size of your belt buckle.

    14. Re:tech is a fairly broad category by aoism · · Score: 0

      If you make $80k in tech in SF, you better be living with 5 other people and eating ramen noodles. I'm at $125 and I feel it is pretty low. I get the luxury of living by myself in a rent controlled $1500/mo 1.5 bedroom .. that is pretty much the only splurge I have. Everything else goes to pay off loans, parking tickets, and the cost of living in the city. I know guys here that are Sr. Software Engineers making $180k. The average for in my group of friends for Senior Rails or Java dudes is around $140k.

    15. Re:tech is a fairly broad category by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Ha. And to think my California boss once mocked us east coasters for hating diversity.

    16. Re:tech is a fairly broad category by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

      You should probably consider the cost of buying a home or paying rent in your calculations.

      At the peak of the downturn I spent ~$800k on a condo on the peninsula (which has since gone up in value. woo.) In many other areas of the country this would buy you a mansion in the (proverbial) hills. I have family in the midwest with a ~4000 square foot home for ~$300-400k on a lake. And this isn't out in the country. Firmly in suburbia.

      Yes you can buy homes in parts of the bay area for less than that (and commute 50 miles in bumper to bumper traffic each way...), but I could also go buy a
      modest home in the midwest for $80-$100k instead of comparing it to a mansion.

    17. Re:tech is a fairly broad category by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I hear this a lot, but as someone who lived a good life for a few years in the Bay Area on a grad-student stipend, I don't really believe it, at least if you don't have kids. I don't understand how single people could make $80k and feel they can't handle the cost of living, unless it's due to social factors (all their friends make more, so they're spending a shit-ton of money on bars, restaurants, and other entertainment).

      Most people get married and have kids at some point. Say you want a house...

    18. Re:tech is a fairly broad category by Trepidity · · Score: 2

      Buying a home is indeed absurdly expensive. But obviously I didn't exclude the cost of paying rent in my calculations, because I actually lived there, and actually paid rent! I paid about $1400 for a 1-bd apartment. That's $17,000/yr, which should certainly be doable if you make $80,000/yr.

    19. Re:tech is a fairly broad category by Trepidity · · Score: 1

      Well, it's the 21st century and we're all modern now, so both partners would work, right? $80k x 2 = $160k. :)

    20. Re:tech is a fairly broad category by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You say that average for a Senior Rails or Java developer is $140,000. How many years of experience does it take to be "Senior"?

    21. Re:tech is a fairly broad category by Trepidity · · Score: 2

      I guess I don't know about actual SF; never lived in the City. But I lived in the Bay Area making $30k and I felt like I was doing fine. Paid about the same as you for an apartment, which took a bit over half my income. Spent the rest on groceries, craft beer, and miscellaneous entertainment.

    22. Re:tech is a fairly broad category by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Most people would consider transitioning from owning a 2 bedroom house with property to renting a 1 bedroom apartment to be a signficant reduction in standard of living. I agree that you can live in the Bay area fine on 80k/year, but it hardly compares to most of the rest of the country.

    23. Re:tech is a fairly broad category by ganjadude · · Score: 1

      what exactly do you mean by rifraff.......

      --
      have you seen my sig? there are many others like it but none that are the same
    24. Re:tech is a fairly broad category by Trepidity · · Score: 1

      I really fucking hate yardwork, so I personally wouldn't agree with that, though I agree plenty of people would. I like living in apartments, in reasonably urban areas where I can walk to things. Bay Area is decent for that, though there are better deals if you have the capacity to move, like parts of Chicago. It's at least cheaper than Manhattan.

    25. Re:tech is a fairly broad category by Narcocide · · Score: 2

      We LOVE diversity as long as it stays on the dinner plate.

    26. Re:tech is a fairly broad category by Qwell · · Score: 4, Funny

      She was in Texas though. She just needed a bigger buckle.

      --
      As of 10/06/03, I hate COBOL developers.
    27. Re:tech is a fairly broad category by Narcocide · · Score: 2

      Rifraff: What most of the people driving $100,000+ cars would call me.

    28. Re:tech is a fairly broad category by highwind7777 · · Score: 1

      After taxes, medicare, social, etc, $125k is $80k take-home. What do you spend $6600/month on?

    29. Re:tech is a fairly broad category by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      That's ridiculous, $1500*12 = $18k a year. Subtract taxes from $125k and you should still be at about $80k.

      That leaves you over $60k after taxes and rent. If you can't manage to pay your loans and live comfortably on that much money (while putting away a bit of savings at well) you are a spoiled brat.

      At $80k sharing a nice 2 BR you are still talking $40k "to live on". You may not want to constantly drop $100+ a weekend on dinner and drinks, but ramen noodles my ass.

    30. Re:tech is a fairly broad category by peragrin · · Score: 5, Insightful

      two facts
      the average ceo in 1970 earned $500,000 in 2000 it was $5,000,000
      the average empolyee in 1970 earned $19.26 in 2000 it was $19.74

      The exact numbers are off a little bit as I am going form memory the fact is unless your on the board of directors your pay has been basically flat. IT is just the lastest group to be shafted by corporate boards.

      Remember it is perfectly fine for a company to fire 1,000 people and then pay the board those people's salaries as executive compensation. Wall street supports such moves by increasing your stock price.

      --
      i thought once I was found, but it was only a dream.
    31. Re:tech is a fairly broad category by jmintha · · Score: 1

      So using rough numbers based on my taxes (in Canada, so yours should be lower), if you are earning $125K, you are taking home something like $7000 a month. Deducting your rent, you are left with $5500. Obviously I don't know how many loans you have, or how many parking tickets, but that's a fair bit of cash SF might have a high cost of living, but you really don't have much left at the end of the month?

    32. Re:tech is a fairly broad category by jedidiah · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Your sister sounds like someone that's never actually been in Texas. It's a little more diverse than Hollywood stereotypes (which you happen to be repeating) would lead you to believe.

      --
      A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
    33. Re:tech is a fairly broad category by jedidiah · · Score: 2

      Both state and federal taxes will come down on you like a load of bricks in that situation.

      Plus the kids don't just watch themselves while both parents are off at work.

      --
      A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
    34. Re:tech is a fairly broad category by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

      Does she drive a Prius now? The forecast for the SF area warned of heavy Smug for the coming week.

    35. Re:tech is a fairly broad category by Altus · · Score: 2

      See, learning new skills should improve your pay, but even without it your pay should be going up steadily just to account for increases in the cost of living. Hell you should be beating that for a while just because of the additional value you gain simply through experience.

      Yes, training matters so you have trained up and seen your wages go up and you think that is good but the fact of the matter is they haven't gone up by as much as they should because you are working from a flat baseline while cost of living has gone up. That is why these statistics are important. I make twice what I did when I got out of school but I am more than twice as valuable as I was and that twice as much doesn't go as far as it would have back then.

      --

      "In America, first you get the sugar, then you get the power, then you get the women..." -H. Simpson

    36. Re:tech is a fairly broad category by jedidiah · · Score: 1

      IT workers are only interchangeable if they aren't any good.

      Shit will hit the fan and they will have no way to cope. You will ask for something unusual and they will have no way to cope.

      Trained monkeys that do nothing but run someone elses scripts are a dime a dozen but that's not the totality of IT.

      --
      A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
    37. Re:tech is a fairly broad category by Lashat · · Score: 1

      Just move out of commuting range of San Francisco or Silicon Valley and you can buy 4x the house for the same money.

      --
      For every benefit you receive a tax is levied. - Ralph Waldo Emerson
    38. Re:tech is a fairly broad category by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And if they don't live out of their car, they'll have the same disposable income as someone making $35k/year in a city with sane living expenses.

    39. Re:tech is a fairly broad category by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Try 120k (with yearly stock) straight out of college.

    40. Re:tech is a fairly broad category by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      i make less than $80k/year, i support two people (myself and my gf) on my salary, and i just bought a house in a decent neighborhood in the upper east bay on my salary. my commute is less than 15 miles and i can either drive myself (30-45 minutes depending on traffic) or take bart (30-45 minutes depending on traffic getting to the station). sure, i could have gotten 5x the house i currently have if i lived in some other state, but the fact is that it is INCREDIBLY easy to live on less than $80k per year in the SF bay area. all you have to do is live within your means, something most people don't seem able to comprehend.

    41. Re:tech is a fairly broad category by ub3r+n3u7r4l1st · · Score: 1

      In east asian cultures your parents ( = your kids grandparents) moves in with you, so now you get free child care.

    42. Re:tech is a fairly broad category by Synerg1y · · Score: 1

      Isn't there an argument that Texas can be effectively split into 5 states based on it's diversity (good and bad)?

    43. Re:tech is a fairly broad category by EllisDees · · Score: 2

      Yep, it's the same way in Seattle. There is so much competition for good programmers that you can almost write your own paycheck.

      --
      -- Give me ambiguity or give me something else!
    44. Re:tech is a fairly broad category by cluedweasel · · Score: 3, Funny

      Well, the longer you're there, diverse it gets....

    45. Re:tech is a fairly broad category by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Individual employees' pay should be going up steadily, but is it really shocking that the wages for the same job/experience should remain flat? Admittedly, there is probably some change in the underlying age/experience demographics, but it is probably not massive. Should someone hired today at entry level really expect more (inflation aside) than in 2000?

    46. Re:tech is a fairly broad category by Macman408 · · Score: 1

      I can see how some people would have that feeling. My paycheck roughly gets divided into thirds - 1/3 goes to taxes, 1/3 goes to retirement and other savings deducted directly from my paycheck, and 1/3 goes to my bank account, where it then pays for rent, a car payment, food, and a small amount of discretionary spending. Apart from the fact that I'm saving up for retirement, it feels very much like I have very little spare cash because I'm spending it all on my rent and groceries.

      When I was a grad student, I was willing to live without a car, had no retirement savings, and paid much lower taxes, and thus lived on much less money. Honestly, no matter how much money you make, your expenses will generally balloon to match it, one way or another.

    47. Re:tech is a fairly broad category by Trepidity · · Score: 2

      Boston is by far the most segregated city i've been in (and I've lived in the South), so there is something to it.

    48. Re:tech is a fairly broad category by 0111+1110 · · Score: 1

      Can you explain to me how you even got a job straight out of college? Did you answer an ad that said,"Programmers wanted. Bachelors in CS. No experience necessary." Do such ads really exist? I've never seen one.

      --
      Quite an experience to live in fear, isn't it? That's what it is to be a slave.
    49. Re:tech is a fairly broad category by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Yes, because everybody knows that if you're not living in San Francisco, it's impossible to have culture. If she chose to live in a dinkhole small town in Texas, that's her loss. DFW and Austin both have plenty of culture to participate in - Austin is actually one of the best live music cities in the nation, and well worth a visit just for that.

      You should probably try visiting sometime, you'd probably be very surprised.

    50. Re:tech is a fairly broad category by reve_etrange · · Score: 1

      BTW 80k to start in SF seems pretty horrible

      You're wrong, the cost of living is not as high as you think.

      If you are the sole earner for a family of four, 80k could be tough (depending on your neighborhood and if you want to own). However, if you are a "kid coming out of college," you probably support no more than one additional person (who may or may not also work) and are looking to rent. $1500 for a two bedroom unit is steep compared to other parts of the country, but hardly unaffordable on $80k/yr.

      --
      .: Semper Absurda :.
    51. Re:tech is a fairly broad category by highwind7777 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      There is a huge talent shortage in the bay area. If you are decent at problem solving, algorithms and coding you almost need a baseball bat to keep the recruiters away. The ads don't say "programmers wanted". They say "Come work for us! We have an unlimited vacation policy, all meals provided, on-site gym, a collaborative culture, and give meaningful equity".

    52. Re:tech is a fairly broad category by AvitarX · · Score: 1

      at 1/3 being saved you are investing in your future recreation though, that's worth a lot.

      Assuming 40 year career (25-65) you'll be well set (my math on earlier retirement with reasonable growth assumptions was putting 20% of gross away).

      --
      Wow, sent an e-mail as suggested when clicking on "use classic" banner, and got a fast response that addressed my msg
    53. Re:tech is a fairly broad category by ClioCJS · · Score: 1

      what a load of bullshit. Our mortgage + utilities was $1500/mo and my wife & I lived comfortably on $50K total income for 4 years straight. "The closet of living in the city" must include a lot of self-rationalized, unnecessary bullshit... Because living in the D.C. beltway isn't the cheapest place either.

      --
      -Clio
      Karma: Bad (mostly from not giving a fuck)
      Blog: http://clintjcl.wordpress.com
    54. Re:tech is a fairly broad category by reve_etrange · · Score: 3, Insightful

      You don't have to go far at all, or even choose a bad neighborhood. Think, Point Richmond, Richmond Annex, El Cerrito, Daly City, South SF...not to mention much of Oakland (you only think it's dangerous).

      --
      .: Semper Absurda :.
    55. Re:tech is a fairly broad category by ClioCJS · · Score: 1
      Yes, he's a spoiled brat. My wife & I made $50K total for 4 yrs, living in a similarly expensive area (inside d.c. beltway)... and were quite comfortable. No frills, but we still got to buy some $2500 window replacements a couple years, and new harddrives when we needed 'em. GP is a total fucking spoiled brat.

      (I finally got a job, so... now we're making more than that, yay.)

      --
      -Clio
      Karma: Bad (mostly from not giving a fuck)
      Blog: http://clintjcl.wordpress.com
    56. Re:tech is a fairly broad category by aoism · · Score: 1
      Monthly, $125k for me is:
      • $6100 after taxes, health insurance, and 401k contributions
      • $1550/mo cost of living (50/day food ($15 meal average after tip), public transportation ($4 - $6/day), coffee, $8/pack cigarettes, etc.)
      • $365 (cable/electric/gas/phone)
      • $1530 rent
      • $600/mo for loans/credit card pay offs
      • $500/mo for car insurance / gas/ tickets (no note)

      Leaves $1555 for the other stuff .. like going out to bars, enjoying life, taking a vacation once in a while and having money to do it without touching savings, doctor visits, movies, concerts, buying new toys once in a while.

      I'm not hurting, but when you consider that I save around $800/month, and the average cost of a house in SF is $735k, it would take 15 years to have enough money for just the 20% down payment in the present, which by then would be probably only 12% of the total cost of the house. Also you have to consider my rent is really cheap as it is rent controlled. Apartment seekers here are faced with 1 bedroom rents of $2000 and up, and 2 bedrooms at $3k or more, if they can even find a place .. and it is going up even more because of guys like me that aren't completely priced out of getting a place.

      125k is OK for me. It's not enough for a person who wants to live in the city and have a social life and doesn't want to live with 5 other people in a 1200 sqft place, and who has aspirations of buying a house here.

    57. Re:tech is a fairly broad category by reve_etrange · · Score: 1

      Yup, sounds about right, except if you come over to the right side of the Bay you can get a second bedroom or an office for that money.

      --
      .: Semper Absurda :.
    58. Re:tech is a fairly broad category by AvitarX · · Score: 1

      Hour by what mode of transportation, and where?

      I found most of NYC is just about an hour from NYC when I'm there.

      --
      Wow, sent an e-mail as suggested when clicking on "use classic" banner, and got a fast response that addressed my msg
    59. Re:tech is a fairly broad category by reve_etrange · · Score: 1

      Wall street supports such moves by increasing your stock price.

      Wall Street does so at its own peril. Look at corporate profits over that same period (1970 - present). All the labor suppression in the world couldn't save the corporate rate of profit.

      --
      .: Semper Absurda :.
    60. Re:tech is a fairly broad category by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Senior Rails developers must use OS X, wear skinny jeans and listen to indie folk rock. All other experience is irrelevant.

    61. Re:tech is a fairly broad category by reve_etrange · · Score: 2

      Let's say in addition to $18,000 / yr on rent, you spend $2,000 / mo. on food, and the same amount on each on health care and discretionary spending. That's $90,000 / yr. You probably pay about $35,000 in taxes, leaving you with $90,000.

      So you should be breaking even if you are spending literally $4,000 on food and luxury items every month.

      --
      .: Semper Absurda :.
    62. Re:tech is a fairly broad category by reve_etrange · · Score: 1

      But I lived in the Bay Area making $30k and I felt like I was doing fine

      That's where I'm at right now. In "actual SF" the only difference would be an additional $500 or so in rent, which would only cut into my miscellaneous entertainment a little bit, and leave my craft beer purchases totally unaffected.

      --
      .: Semper Absurda :.
    63. Re:tech is a fairly broad category by Renraku · · Score: 1

      The problem is that the trend simply can't go on forever. It'll come to the point where companies have to start selling off vast assets and workers just to pay the ruling class a little more, then you get a bunch of chiefs yelling at each other to make some profit, but there's no more workers, and they sure aren't going to dirty their hands.

      This only applies to companies that actually provide products/services, not investment firms and the like that just shift money around between accounts to generate a couple of bucks.

      --
      Job? I don't have time to get a job! Who will sit around and bitch about being broke and unemployed then?
    64. Re:tech is a fairly broad category by Rockoon · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I really fucking hate yardwork, so I personally wouldn't agree with that, though I agree plenty of people would.

      You can spend a portion of the money you save by living anywhere else, hiring someone else to do the yard work for you. Then you have this other money you can spend too.

      The California distortion field is strong on slashdot. For example, people that think its reasonable to pay $800K for a condo, and people that think $1400 is reasonable for a one bedroom apartment.

      In almost the entire country, $1400 is more than a mortgage payment on a very nice house. If you live in California then the odds are very good that you don't really have a grasp of the typical cost of living anywhere else. This is why Californians cannot comprehend how someone could live on $45K/year (the national median) elsewhere in the country, or why $20/day is actually extremely nice pay in China putting Foxconn workers on the road to early retirement.

      --
      "His name was James Damore."
    65. Re:tech is a fairly broad category by 0111+1110 · · Score: 1

      Holy fuck! Jesus. I don't know if I just graduated at the wrong time (1992) or in the wrong place (Florida, but I looked in Boston too), but that kind of thing may as well come from a different planet. It's the first time I've ever heard of anything like that. Well, in the mid 80s when I was in high school I guess it was possible to get a programming job even without a CS or any other degree. That's what I heard at least and my cousin got a job like that (and he wasn't even a geek; but maybe that was an advantage). Was it like that in the early-mid 90s over there as well? I wish someone had told me. I would have moved in a heartbeat.

      --
      Quite an experience to live in fear, isn't it? That's what it is to be a slave.
    66. Re:tech is a fairly broad category by Rockoon · · Score: 1

      Both state and federal taxes will come down on you like a load of bricks in that situation.

      We are talking about Californians.. they are more than happy to pay their taxes.. even to the point of wanting to pay more.. thats how they seem to vote and talk, anyways.

      (note: many bay area people dont realize that they are in the top 10% because when they look around they see $140K/year as being about average)

      --
      "His name was James Damore."
    67. Re:tech is a fairly broad category by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      In my area (not US) if your skills have flattened so has your salary. If you grow and expand your abilties, there is plenty of room for growth.

      BTW 80k to start in SF seems pretty horrible considering the cost of living there I dont find it surprising to command 6 figures after proving oneself.

      80K does seem low. I'm in Austin, TX and started out of college 4 years ago at 70K one job change later, I'm making 90K+. Which is like 150K in SV.

    68. Re:tech is a fairly broad category by Trepidity · · Score: 1

      Did you miss the part where I lived comfortably in the Bay Area on $30k/year? Who needs $45k/year?

      And yes, I've also lived in Houston. It's cheaper, all, right. But it sucks. You have to drive fucking forever to get anywhere. And the weather requires A/C for about 8 months a year.

    69. Re:tech is a fairly broad category by Rockoon · · Score: 1

      ..so you moved from one retarded place to another... good choices.

      --
      "His name was James Damore."
    70. Re:tech is a fairly broad category by SScorpio · · Score: 1

      You forgot the perk of bohemian drums circles following you around as you code.

      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5GpOfwbFRcs

    71. Re:tech is a fairly broad category by Trepidity · · Score: 1

      So what's the magical location that has real-estate price like Houston, but walkability like SF?

    72. Re:tech is a fairly broad category by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      More importantly, Americans in IT have to compete with not just outsourcing but insourcing of H1s. Silicon Valley in 2000 had a 50% White 40% Asian workforce, now it's 40% White 50% Asian.

      Of course, if you want to work in construction, you have to compete with illegally insourced Mexicans. IT people have it better off than most.

      This is going to be modded down because it is racist to notice that wages are flat for Americans, Americans are out of work, and immigration is rolling along as fast as possible.

    73. Re:tech is a fairly broad category by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I live in Texas and have so far worked with people from Pakistan/India/Sri Lanka/Iran/Ukraine/England/China/South Korea/Puerto Rico/Mexico/Philippines/Mali/ (2x lived in but not from Saudi Arabia). At the local college I also met people from Germany/Nepal/Trinidad and Tobago/Denmark....

    74. Re:tech is a fairly broad category by Zeromous · · Score: 2

      >1500 for a two bedroom unit is steep compared to other parts of the country, but hardly unaffordable on $80k/yr.

      It is if you are saving properly for a downpayment and a 401k.

      --
      ---Up Up Down Down Left Right Left Right B A START
    75. Re:tech is a fairly broad category by Zeromous · · Score: 1

      At 80k per year you should be able to live on your own, save for your retirement, downpayment on a house and buy a car. In San Fran, thats the bare minimum to do that.

      That's a LIVING WAGE in America-

        Not getting by living with roomies so you can flush with cash. Are you going to live with roomies the rest of your life?

      --
      ---Up Up Down Down Left Right Left Right B A START
    76. Re:tech is a fairly broad category by Zeromous · · Score: 1

      Thats funny, I make a little more than you, family of 3 with lots of help from parents, cheapest house in my area, and after 15 years of experience I can barely afford my life on one income.

      $2500 window replacements? Fixing the windows in my house cost 6k lowest bid and I couldn't even fix the picture window or the DOORS.

      --
      ---Up Up Down Down Left Right Left Right B A START
    77. Re:tech is a fairly broad category by Gorobei · · Score: 1, Informative

      Individual employees' pay should be going up steadily, but is it really shocking that the wages for the same job/experience should remain flat? Admittedly, there is probably some change in the underlying age/experience demographics, but it is probably not massive. Should someone hired today at entry level really expect more (inflation aside) than in 2000?

      Not shocking, just common sense...

      Replace: "Despite the fact that technology plays an increasingly important role in the economy, IT wages remain persistently flat.

      With: "Despite the fact that fast food plays an increasingly important role in the economy, fast food wages remain persistently flat.

      The world is automating low-level IT jobs just like it automated other low-skill manual labor. Ten years from now, 90% of IT jobs will be closer to minimum wage, and the other 10% will be more lucrative "professional" jobs.

    78. Re:tech is a fairly broad category by Zeromous · · Score: 1

      LOL show me where in San Fran you can mortgage a house + utils for 1500$ /month.

      My 250k home in canada is 1300$ in mortgage alone, and thats with a 15% downpayment!

      --
      ---Up Up Down Down Left Right Left Right B A START
    79. Re:tech is a fairly broad category by ClioCJS · · Score: 1
      $2500 for a single window (really, a set of 3). Here's one and here's the other.

      Now, we lucked out in finding a single-family home that was only $141K in 1998. It's old and has problems, but we've been there 13 yrs and are happy. It was literally about the cheapest non-townhouse in Fairfax County on sale at th etime. It goes for almost double that now, though finding a buyer would be hard with what we've done to it. We also built an addition ($85K) around 2005, which is a factor in why the house is worth about double now.

      Now, the $50K was only for the 4.5 yrs I didn't work (or the 2.5 yrs i didn't work 1999-2001ish). On years we both worked we'd pull in $90-100K. So there was always a savings to fall back on. But in 4.5 yrs of $50K-only, our savings only dropped 50% ($20K->$10K). Plus we refinanced last year, which got our mortgage down from $1300 to $1030.

      It's not as cut and dried as I laid it out in my first post.... But... Someone making $120K whining about not making ends meet with a $1500/mo apartment definitely makes my bullshit meter fire off! :) I think it's pretty easy to make ends meet unless you have some odd sickness or legal problems (kids kind of fall into both of thos categories, haha).

      Also it's probably easier for us because we're highschool sweethearts so we never had to set up alone... out of our parents' houses into our own. The economy of scale goes back to our dorm days..

      --
      -Clio
      Karma: Bad (mostly from not giving a fuck)
      Blog: http://clintjcl.wordpress.com
    80. Re:tech is a fairly broad category by RocketRabbit · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Despite what we are led to believe by the hit TV series Glee, drag shows are NOT culture.

    81. Re:tech is a fairly broad category by Trepidity · · Score: 4, Insightful

      That's true: I used to live in California, but the taxes were too low for me, so I moved to Denmark. ;-)

      Of course, now I actually get something for my taxes. I get 100% of my healthcare paid for, and great transit, among other things.

    82. Re:tech is a fairly broad category by Gorobei · · Score: 5, Insightful

      >1500 for a two bedroom unit is steep compared to other parts of the country, but hardly unaffordable on $80k/yr.

      It is if you are saving properly for a downpayment and a 401k.

      Lose your sense of entitlement. $80K/year, -20K taxes, -18K rent = $42K/year. You are doing way better than most people.

      So you want to exclude $15K pretax for your retirement and maybe $15K so you can have a downpayment in a few years? You still have $1K/month for food, drink, and fun. You are doing pretty damn well for a young person.

    83. Re:tech is a fairly broad category by Entrope · · Score: 1

      Sure -- but there are a bunch of hiring managers who haven't realized that yet. And a lot of the rest can hire the dime-a-dozen types to offload work from the better-compensated competent people.

    84. Re:tech is a fairly broad category by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Apart from the Ruby on Rails requirement I have no problem with the other stated requirements. Although I would prefer to work from home most days of the week. ;)

    85. Re:tech is a fairly broad category by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      what exactly do you mean by rifraff.

      Do you have a mirror handy?

    86. Re:tech is a fairly broad category by Stormthirst · · Score: 0

      It would help if the Republican party (through Fox Noise) did keep on spouting about how this is how it's always been and that you should be lucky to have a job at all, let alone in this environment. And is re-iterated on Slashdot frequently. Until it applies to the tech sector because obviously that's different some how.

    87. Re:tech is a fairly broad category by Gr8Apes · · Score: 1

      Texas is allowed to split into 5 states, more or less, depending upon whom you listen to. Prior to 1861, yes, they could, and there was no diversity clause.

      --
      The cesspool just got a check and balance.
    88. Re:tech is a fairly broad category by Gr8Apes · · Score: 1

      Right now, between 401Ks and savings, it's close to 50% of income. I have 0 intention of working my present job past 60, and would prefer something closer to 55, although 50 would be better. That doesn't mean I'd stop working, I'd just stop running on the treadmill.

      --
      The cesspool just got a check and balance.
    89. Re:tech is a fairly broad category by darkshadow88 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Really, eating restaurant meals 3 times a day? That's part of your problem.

      I also make $125k and likewise, my take-home is about $6100. I spend even more on rent for a 1-bedroom than you, and my student loans are higher, and I do just fine:

      • $6100 take-home after taxes/insurance/401k
      • -$1800 rent
      • -$ 250 utilities (soon to be $190 once I'm sure I like the 100min/5GB $30 T-Mobile plan)
      • -$ 400 cost of living ($8 lunch each day, one $20 dinner a week, and about $150 in groceries a month)
      • -$ 900 student loans

      Leaves me $2750, much of which I can put toward paying off my loans faster, after which I'll start really focusing on saving. As for transportation, I walk to work. The central location is why my rent is so high, but I offset that by not having the expense of a vehicle. I get free public transit, but even if I paid for it, my transit trips would probably only cost me about $20/month. If I really want to drive somewhere, there's Zipcar.

      I grew up in a working poor family, so maybe I just know how to manage money better than some people. As it is, I feel guilty about my $8/day lunches when I could probably pack my own lunch for $1/day. That's ~$150/mo I could be saving, all without any real decrease in quality of life.

      And let me emphasize: that $2750 I'm left with is more than most people in this country gross. The median personal gross income in the U.S. as of 2005, among people over 18, was $24,062. Adjusting for inflation (I couldn't find current data), that's $28,500, or $2375 a month. Even if you look at the over 25 numbers (I'm under 25, btw, and I suspect you are, too), my spare cash after all my expenses still exceeds the median net income (though not quite the gross).

      TL;DR: We have more disposable income than more than half the people in this country gross. Even with your wasteful spending, you have $1555 a month left, which is far more disposable income than most people in this country have. You have no reason to complain.

    90. Re:tech is a fairly broad category by sydneyfong · · Score: 1

      Just an hour or two drive south from Foxconn's Shenzhen factories is this place where a $800K (converted from local currency) condo is considered "cheap", as is $1400 rent for one bedroom apartment. In case you're wondering, the medium household income there is around $30K/year.

      I know it's twisted, but having been raised and living in Hong Kong for so many years, I actually find tiny apartments "better" in the sense that you can walk less in your apartment, like when you want to get a quick bite from the kitchen, or need to go to the toilet.... this is probably an awkward way of adopting to the environment when you're used to having less than 200 ft of personal space in your home, but when I moved to California a few weeks ago, I "sort of" missed that.

      Compared to the insanity of Hong Kong, California isn't _that_ bad. And for those who haven't lived in SF -- I find it a pretty decent place to live in. Sure your house might be much smaller in terms of space, but if you look beyond your walls, you'll find some value in living in an interesting city -- whether that's worth the additional cost is subjective... apparently the people actually living in SF find it's a worthwhile trade off.

      Just my 2 cents.

      --
      Don't quote me on this.
    91. Re:tech is a fairly broad category by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      what exactly do you mean by rifraff.......

      Heteros

    92. Re:tech is a fairly broad category by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If you have to ask, you probably belong on that dinner plate lol!

    93. Re:tech is a fairly broad category by ireallyhateslashdot · · Score: 1

      Boston is by far the most segregated city i've been in (and I've lived in the South), so there is something to it.

      I've got to agree. I just moved from Boston to North Carolina, the differences amazed me. Although, I lived in Detroit before that, and nobody does racial segregation quite like southeast Michigan.

    94. Re:tech is a fairly broad category by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      See, learning new skills should improve your pay, but even without it your pay should be going up steadily just to account for increases in the cost of living.

      We have a word for "increases in the cost of living" that affect the entire population: inflation.
      Other increases (i.e. local or circumstance-specific ones that don't affect the whole population) wouldn't need pay increases across the whole population, thus shouldn't affect the average wage much.

      TFS says that after adjusting for inflation, average tech wages have only increased slightly. Fits well...

      Hell you should be beating that for a while just because of the additional value you gain simply through experience.

      As an individual, yes. As a population consisting of a relatively consistent distribution of fresh youngsters and experienced hands, no. Each individual starts at the bottom, moves up the scale, then retires, but the average remains more or less the same.

      While I'm not disputing your account of how your own pay has stagnated in ways you don't think it should, your generalizations of that to the whole population are rubbish. If the whole population had wages that weren't keeping up with the cost of living, the inflation-adjusted wage would have gone down, not slightly up.

    95. Re:tech is a fairly broad category by MacDork · · Score: 1

      Corporations don't make a profit. Didn't you know? If they did that, they'd have to pay taxes.

    96. Re:tech is a fairly broad category by SecurityTheatre · · Score: 1

      See, learning new skills should improve your pay, but even without it your pay should be going up steadily just to account for increases in the cost of living.

      And TFA *CLEARLY* stated "adjusted for inflation", which means (by definition) "increases in the cost of living".

      Hell you should be beating that for a while just because of the additional value you gain simply through experience.

      This is not analyzing ONE workers pay over a career, but the industry average. Old timers retire, youth enters the fray. Having "stagnant" wages isn't an entirely bad thing unless the supply vs demand for a specific skill set is increasing dramatically.

    97. Re:tech is a fairly broad category by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I make ~$125 in California (not the Bay Area, but similarly expensive). $10250 a month gross translates to $4800/month net. Just chew on that for a while.

      Add in rent (I have roommates, so it could be worse) sub-par retirement savings, paying off student loans and a decent amount of CC/installment debt, insurance (high), food/groceries/gas, and a car payment... I end up with not too much free.

      Certainly I have it better than many of my friends, and I could stop paying down debt if I needed to and not spend as much at NewEgg, but I'm nowhere near rolling in dough.

    98. Re:tech is a fairly broad category by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well, I pay $1800 for a 2br in Toronto. It's a city thing, not a "California" thing. I mean, a proper city where you can take a train to the theatre, or the movies, or walk to the store or a pub... I don't mean a collection collection of suburbs connected by interstates like what exists in Texas and some other states (that's not a city, except in the US). :-)

    99. Re:tech is a fairly broad category by SecurityTheatre · · Score: 1

      You don't need workers when you have robots....

    100. Re:tech is a fairly broad category by erp_consultant · · Score: 1

      Not much lower. I lived in Boston for a few years and could not get out of there fast enough. The cost of housing was outrageous. Finding a decent rental was nearly impossible. Most of them are these dilapidated triple deckers with drafty windows, on street parking, and require key money. On top of that there is shitty weather most of the year. Nice place to visit, didn't enjoy living there.

      SF is very expensive but I would sooner pay to live there than Boston.

    101. Re:tech is a fairly broad category by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Seriously, douche, that's over $6,000 per month after taxes.

      You blow $5,000 in cash AFTER rent and you're bitching?

      Most people spend 30% of their after tax income on housing. That's on the low side of the median. You can completely afford a $2,300/mo rent and still be under the median expenditure for housing.

      Hell, if you have $100,000 in loans (which is absurdly high), the premium is $1400/mo. This leaves you $3,600 in DISCRESSIONARY SPENDING.

      That's higher than the MEDIAN salary in the US.

      You spend barely 15% of your income on your house and you say 'its the only splurge"

      What do you DO with all your money? You know toilet paper is cheaper than using $20 bills on the john, right?

    102. Re:tech is a fairly broad category by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Bottom line is that he's correct and $125K is not enough to purchase property in San Francisco. So an alternative life-style is rent-control and blowing your excess income on booze, cigarettes, and restaurants.

    103. Re:tech is a fairly broad category by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah. Sure, sometimes the cost of living in "tech hubs" can be outrageous but when I graduated from college and got my first job it was in a flyover state with a low cost of living and my starting salary added up to approximately $45k before taxes. Sure the cost of living there was really low compared to a lot of places but it wasn't a third world country either.

      After two years there and only managing to get my salary up to $48k or so I decided to move, financially it was a bit tricky since I didn't exactly have huge amount of money (especially not with student loan payments, wanted to pay those loans off as soon as possible) but my next job paid roughly $65k and in just a couple of years I had blown past $80k.

      Still, financially I fell behind those I went to school with who got their first job in California...

    104. Re:tech is a fairly broad category by drew_eckhardt · · Score: 1

      _Starting_ compensation packages for new BS graduates at the big SF bay tech employers are north of $100K.

      http://www.netpaths.net/blog/starting-salaries-of-top-technology-companies-apple-google-microsoft-facebook/

      Compensation packages for senior staff / principal level engineering positions for guys 15+ years into their career with meaty projects under their belt (fifteen years of entry level work won't do it) and no management detour at profitable companies are over $200K

      In spite of that positions go unfilled.

    105. Re:tech is a fairly broad category by AncientPC · · Score: 1

      Depends on where you live. The cities are diverse, the rural areas are not. I've lived in Texas for ~3 decades, and will be selling my house to move to SF / SoMa soon. I am used to being the only non-white when visiting Lockhart, Mineral Wells, Fredericksburg, College Station, and other smaller towns around the state.

      FWIW, the SV offers I received were about double what I got from Austin companies.

    106. Re:tech is a fairly broad category by darkshadow88 · · Score: 2

      s/alternative/irresponsible

      Just because you can't buy a house in a given area doesn't mean it makes sense to go blow all your money.

    107. Re:tech is a fairly broad category by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Just become a cop in NY:
      "Rivera's hourly wage is already a nice $51.88, but for overtime hours, that wage increases to $77.82."

      http://www.businessinsider.com/this-port-authority-police-sergeant-doubled-his-salary-with-overtime-pay-2012-6

    108. Re:tech is a fairly broad category by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Let's see Apple CEO $377,996,537 and 307,239 jobs. That amounts to $1500 an employee if they fired the CEO and redistributed the wealth which is a 3% COLA basically. Or with an median salary of $100K, they'd have to fire 3700 just to make the CEO salary.

      http://www.aflcio.org/Corporate-Watch/CEO-Pay-and-the-99/100-Highest-Paid-CEOs
      http://www.apple.com/about/job-creation/
      http://www.salarylist.com/company/Apple-Salary.htm

    109. Re:tech is a fairly broad category by Maxo-Texas · · Score: 1

      Essentially, the CEO's have gone from 50x average wages in 1978 to over 500x average wages today.

      --
      She was like chocolate when she drank... semi-sweet at first and then increasingly bitter.
    110. Re:tech is a fairly broad category by bzipitidoo · · Score: 4, Interesting

      10 years ago I was making $80k/year in the Monterey area. You certainly can live on that, if you stay the hell out of a house. I rented an apartment for $900 per month. Cheapest house I saw was half a million for a tiny, run down 1950s house with 2 bed, 1 bath. I could have had something for "only" $300k in Salinas, about 20 miles away. But something else to think about is the lack of job security. And sure enough, that job ended in a total train wreck. I could have entered into a brutal mortgage, only to have to sell a year later. Sales commission of something like 5%, plus property taxes (I never did find out how bad that was), and most of all the fact that in the first years of a mortgage one does not make much headway on the principal, means I could have easily forked over $50k or more for the privilege of living in a house in California for 1 year. The only thing that would have saved the situation was that houses were still bubbling up at that time. But suppose I had bought a house, and the bubble had burst during the year I was there, and I go underwater on the mortgage? Despite making $80k, I would have lost money on the deal, and would have been better off if I'd been unemployed rather than take that job in California.

      If you're thinking only a dummy would have bought a house, remember at that time it was inconceivable that a house could turn into a bad investment like that. Many people advised me in all seriousness to buy a house. A few of these were my bosses, who leaned on me to commit to a major buy so that in their eyes I would be a more "reliable" employee. That's all part of the management theory of "hold gun to employee's head". I would work harder, because if things blew up I would lose my home. Well, to use a car analogy, pulling off a miracle by making the car able to go 300 mph does not help if the management can't figure out which road to take. And if I also had car payments, a student loan, and a family to support, what would have happened? I can imagine the student loan administrator hammering on me to make payments since I was employed, ratcheting up the rate perhaps even as the house was drowning me.

      So, yeah, $80k per year is not enough to bail you out if you in all innocence pursue the American Dream and it turns into a nightmare. The American Dream wasn't supposed to be a trap.

      --
      Intellectual Property is a monopolistic, selfish, and defective concept. It is "tyranny over the mind of man"
    111. Re:tech is a fairly broad category by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's because tech more often is about abolishing jobs, not bringing added value. With that attitude the wages can't push beyond a certain lower wall of cost effectiveness.

    112. Re:tech is a fairly broad category by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Attitudes like this are why wages are flat.

      Get greedy and entitled, man. The executives are doing it.

    113. Re:tech is a fairly broad category by davester666 · · Score: 1

      Or speedbump...

      --
      Sleep your way to a whiter smile...date a dentist!
    114. Re:tech is a fairly broad category by Eli+Gottlieb · · Score: 1

      How did you afford $17,000/year in rent while living on a grad-student stipend?

    115. Re:tech is a fairly broad category by Eli+Gottlieb · · Score: 1

      What on Earth are you trying to say? You mean to tell me that overproduction leads to a steady fall in the rate of profit until capitalism goes into crisis and the excess capacity is consumed or destroyed in a great crashing conflagration?

      WHY, NOBODY HAS EVER FIGURED THAT OUT BEFORE! Surely and certainly not some messed-up 19th century German economist, journalist and activist named Karl Marx. Definitely probably not.

    116. Re:tech is a fairly broad category by Eli+Gottlieb · · Score: 1

      Completely agreed on the Boston front. Probably the most miserable 5 months of my life, when I lived in Boston.

      $1400 for a basement-floor one-bedroom apartment that hasn't been repaired since the Great Depression? Oh wow, sign me up for that again!

    117. Re:tech is a fairly broad category by Jawnn · · Score: 1

      Your sister sounds like someone that's never actually been in Texas. It's a little more diverse than Hollywood stereotypes (which you happen to be repeating) would lead you to believe.

      I have lived in Texas for many years. While it is true that the state is "a little more diverse...", it is only barely so, and usually not in a good way. The predominant "culture" is ignorant, redneck, WASP. The state school board insists that creationism be taught as science and most of the populace has no problem with that. While there are exceptions (Austin, Galveston, and the very diverse international communities in Houston), there's very, very little that would hold a candle to the cultural diversity found in SF. Oh sure, the folks in the tonier areas around Houston and Dallas like to pretend they're right up there with NYC snobbery, but you can still smell the cow shit on their boots.

    118. Re:tech is a fairly broad category by ShakaUVM · · Score: 1

      >>Lose your sense of entitlement. $80K/year, -20K taxes, -18K rent = $42K/year. You are doing way better than most people.

      $26,000 taxes (we're in California, don't forget - I just ran the tax calculator)

      $22,000 rent

      $3,000 power/water/gas

      $2,000 insurance

      This leaves you with about $2,000 a month for student loans, car, retirement savings, gas, and food.

      >You still have $1K/month for food, drink, and fun. You are doing pretty damn well for a young person.

      I wouldn't categorize it as "pretty damn well". Shit in the Bay Area is ridiculously expensive. That's $33/day for all of your living expenses, including food and gas.

      You're not homeless or anything, but on only $80k/year in the Bay Area, you'll probably want a roommate.

    119. Re:tech is a fairly broad category by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I seriously doubt this. You require no education to work at mcdonald and average education for programming and IT is 2-4+ years.

    120. Re:tech is a fairly broad category by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      OK sure, but you don't get to bomb other countries at will. It's really a great fun for everyone - that's why it's become the American national pastime.

    121. Re:tech is a fairly broad category by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      maybe if you are debt free. being a young person usually means you came through the fire with ASSLOADS of crippling debt. So carve a few hundred a month out of that 1k for that. Add a car, a few more hundred. Hell parking at work can be a few hundred per month alone.

    122. Re:tech is a fairly broad category by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Food, drink, and fun.
      And a car. And car insurance. And commuting/transportation costs. And health insurance. And heat/water/electricity. And a cell phone. And broadband. And maybe even cable TV.
      Not much left for food, let alone drink and fun.
      Modern life is shit.

    123. Re:tech is a fairly broad category by Thaelon · · Score: 1

      Which sounds great until you realize that the cost of living in the SF Bay area is significantly higher than most parts of the US except NYC.

      Comparing salaries without accounting for cost of living is extremely misleading.

      --

      Question everything

    124. Re:tech is a fairly broad category by BVis · · Score: 1

      The American Dream used to be "work hard, make good decisions, and you'll get ahead and give your children advantages you didn't have." Now, it's "Get other people to work hard and take the lion's share of profits for yourself, fuck them." Yet another manifestation of the prevailing "I've got mine, fuck you" attitude that is destroying our country.

      --
      Never underestimate the power of stupid people in large groups.
    125. Re:tech is a fairly broad category by Zeromous · · Score: 1

      I forgot saving to survive for my retirement is entitlement. (also I already own a house thank you which is about 5-10k maintenance per year). For a family for 3 my groceries are 800$ a month, I have about 200$ a month for family entertainment at the end.

      A young person?

      --
      ---Up Up Down Down Left Right Left Right B A START
    126. Re:tech is a fairly broad category by Zeromous · · Score: 1

      >Someone making $120K whining about not making ends meet with a $1500/mo

      Agreed, but this is almost certainly not the case in SF. $1500/mo gets you a one bedroom in a apt far away from work which of course means up to 500+ in commute costs per month. You and I likely don't have these problems (me being in Canada and you in the beltway).

      The point is someone in Toronto/SF making 120k is not nearly as well off as someone in Ottawa/Washington making 50-80.

      I definitely have some sympathy for folks in big urban centers in IT. I am certainly one of the lucky ones.

      --
      ---Up Up Down Down Left Right Left Right B A START
    127. Re:tech is a fairly broad category by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Are you high?
      It's closer to 30k in taxes.

    128. Re:tech is a fairly broad category by erp_consultant · · Score: 1

      Something else I found about Boston - it seemed to be a very transient population and very provincial. I surmised that it was transient because there are so many schools in the general area and many people are only in Boston to attend school and then they go back to where they came from. As a result there seemed to be two kinds of people - born and bred blue blood New Englanders and outsiders, like me. Outsiders spoke differently (without the Boston accent) so we stood out and were easy to identify. Maybe it was just me but I got the impression that New Englanders didn't have much time for outsiders. They seemed a bit cold and insular to me.

      By provincial I mean that there was this general attitude that everything revolved around New England and everything there was the best it could possibly be. I met people that had been born there and had never ventured beyond it's boarders their whole life. In the summer they went to Cape Cod. It led to what I felt was a rather narrow view of the world. There is subtle, but very pronounced, racism there. It's not as easy to spot as it is in the deep south but it's there.

      I met some nice people there but the place just wasn't for me.

    129. Re:tech is a fairly broad category by micahraleigh · · Score: 0

      Entitlement is about comparing your circumstances to other people.

      Worth is about comparing your contributions to what you earn.

    130. Re:tech is a fairly broad category by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Are you including $500 - $700 per month for student loans? I thought not.

    131. Re:tech is a fairly broad category by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Madison, WI But you'll have to have your heat on 9 months out of the year.

    132. Re:tech is a fairly broad category by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Are you subtracting $400/month for health care for a couple? I thought not.

    133. Re:tech is a fairly broad category by mcgrew · · Score: 4, Insightful

      It isn't just tech, it's all industries. Corporate profits are at an all time high, why hasn't any of this money trickled down to the average worker?

      You'd think it was 1925 again.

    134. Re:tech is a fairly broad category by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      $6100 a month? Shit man, that's lovely. I'm a Network Admin in a midwest community (college educated, certified out the ass for w/e corporate wants, been working in this field for this company for ~4 years, no raises or COL increases), and I make $20k/yr. Take home after taxes/benefits, $1600 a month. Rent is $600. After rest of my bills, I have aprox $250 left a month. $100 of that a month ($25 a week) goes into savings, so 'disposable income' for me is about $150 a month. Whoopee!!

    135. Re:tech is a fairly broad category by mcgrew · · Score: 1

      FWIW, the SV offers I received were about double what I got from Austin companies.

      Depending on Austin's economy, the prices in SF may be four or five times as high. I'm in Springfield, IL and am as rich as someone in Chicago who earns twice what I do, because everything costs twice as much up there.

      You might want to take a trip to SF and check it out first.

    136. Re:tech is a fairly broad category by Pope · · Score: 1

      Stop eating out for lunch everyday, that's a few grand or so a year right there.

      --
      It doesn't mean much now, it's built for the future.
    137. Re:tech is a fairly broad category by n7ytd · · Score: 1

      Monthly, $125k for me is:

      • $6100 after taxes, health insurance, and 401k contributions
      • $1550/mo cost of living (50/day food ($15 meal average after tip), public transportation ($4 - $6/day), coffee, $8/pack cigarettes, etc.)
      • $365 (cable/electric/gas/phone)
      • $1530 rent
      • $600/mo for loans/credit card pay offs
      • $500/mo for car insurance / gas/ tickets (no note)

      I'm not hurting, but when you consider that I save around $800/month, and the average cost of a house in SF is $735k, it would take 15 years to have enough money for just the 20% down payment in the present, which by then would be probably only 12% of the total cost of the house. Also you have to consider my rent is really cheap as it is rent controlled. Apartment seekers here are faced with 1 bedroom rents of $2000 and up, and 2 bedrooms at $3k or more, if they can even find a place .. and it is going up even more because of guys like me that aren't completely priced out of getting a place.

      125k is OK for me. It's not enough for a person who wants to live in the city and have a social life and doesn't want to live with 5 other people in a 1200 sqft place, and who has aspirations of buying a house here.

      I'm not in the SF area, so I'll take your numbers at face value and assume that the $735k house is equivalent to the one you could rent for $3k/month.

      With those numbers you would be much better off never buying the house. If you could put 20% down on that $735k house, your mortgage would be $588,000. At 3%, a 30 year mortgage would be about $2500. Your property tax, insurance, and maintenance on the house would put you well above the $3k/month mark, and that's even without considering the $147k down payment that you've invested.

      In some places, rent is cheap. If you owned a $735k house, would you rent it out for so little every month?

    138. Re:tech is a fairly broad category by n7ytd · · Score: 1

      $6100 a month? Shit man, that's lovely. I'm a Network Admin in a midwest community (college educated, certified out the ass for w/e corporate wants, been working in this field for this company for ~4 years, no raises or COL increases), and I make $20k/yr. Take home after taxes/benefits, $1600 a month. Rent is $600. After rest of my bills, I have aprox $250 left a month. $100 of that a month ($25 a week) goes into savings, so 'disposable income' for me is about $150 a month. Whoopee!!

      Something in your numbers doesn't add up... $1600 x 12 months = $19,200 take home. You're taking home $19,200 out of a $20,000 gross?

      If you're working 40 hours/week for 50 weeks a year, your $20k works out to $10/hour. It doesn't matter what area of the country you're in; unless you're getting equity or some other compensation that's not shown here, you're getting screwed.

    139. Re:tech is a fairly broad category by Stiletto · · Score: 1

      You're trading an extra 500 sq. feet or so for a maddening 1.5 to 2 hour commute. Your choice of living conditions in the Bay area is between super-expensive and super-commute. Unless you plan on taking your chances in East Palo Alto or some of the dodgier neighborhoods around eastside San Jose.

    140. Re:tech is a fairly broad category by pnutjam · · Score: 1

      Well said. I see some truly ridiculous job rates advertised in my area. Unemployment is not that low. I guarantee they are not getting top tier, or probably even mid-tier performance but they don't seem to know any better or care.

      I can't count the number I times I have come into a new place and just blow people away with things that I consider mid-tier skills.

    141. Re:tech is a fairly broad category by Stiletto · · Score: 1

      Now, we lucked out in finding a single-family home that was only $141K in 1998.

      There you go, that's the reason you could get by on $50K a year. Good luck doing that today with current home prices around DC or San Francisco.

    142. Re:tech is a fairly broad category by pnutjam · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Spoken like a middle manager who has no idea how much their low quality IT is impacting performance of other workers or hindering their business. They think a professional is expensive, but they are shoveling money with no results.
      In car analogy, they would rather pay someone to take apart their car with a $200 set of craftsman tools and no experience, then take it to a mechanic who can do the same job at book rate in 1/4 to 1/10 of the time. They think it's a bargain because they are getting more hours, meanwhile less is getting done and it's getting done in the worst possible way.

    143. Re:tech is a fairly broad category by Stiletto · · Score: 2

      Parent is correct. I also work in the Bay Area for a medium sized software company, and we're constantly starved for talent, and engineers who know what they are doing are in high demand. Hell, even engineers who do not know what they are doing are getting work. You could literally not know how to program, and still get a programming job for $75K if you can at least spell C++.

    144. Re:tech is a fairly broad category by pnutjam · · Score: 1

      Dealing with my in-laws is not free...

    145. Re:tech is a fairly broad category by AncientPC · · Score: 1

      I've been to SF before, as well as lived in Hawaii and Japan so I'm not really fazed by high prices. Before I accepted the job offer I did use a cost of living comparison calculator. There are also other mitigating factors such as my wife's employability skyrockets in west coast cities.

      Even then, there are other intangibles that you can't measure with a cost of living calculator. I knew quite a few people who took significant pay cuts (25 - 60% decrease) to move to Hawaii. I am interested in working for small companies and / or startups. While Austin's startup community is fairly strong, there really is no comparison to Silicon Valley. People move to NYC for the similar reasons, despite better cost of living situations elsewhere.

      In either case, I can always move back if San Francisco doesn't work out.

    146. Re:tech is a fairly broad category by pnutjam · · Score: 1

      Good point, making things better for our children is society's greatest goal. It seems to have been forgotten by too many people.

    147. Re:tech is a fairly broad category by painandgreed · · Score: 1

      Your sister sounds like someone that's never actually been in Texas. It's a little more diverse than Hollywood stereotypes (which you happen to be repeating) would lead you to believe.

      Sounds like you've never been to SF. Anything you can find in Texas, you can find in San Francisco. One could argue that the cities all have the same stuff, just in different proportions, and being in SF means she find more of what she wants and can get there to whatever you want by public transit if you can't just walk to it in less time it would take to drive across town or the same amount of bible thumping rednecks.

    148. Re: tech is a fairly broad category by thief_inc · · Score: 1

      As a native New Englander, I concur with you 100%. Don't get me wrong I am Sox and Pats all the way but there is a stranger kind of racism in Boston that I have never experienced anywhere else. Southern California had neo Nazis, Texas has its rednecks, but there is something more cold and insidious about the racism in Boston.

      More to the other points, I have lived in Boston, So. Cal., and Texas. For me at this point in my life, Texas works for me better than the others. Inexpensive housing and low cost of living for my family is what matters most. I am employed by an out of state company that baselines the pay for all employees to the bay area. I worked for the same company in socal and my living conditions were pretty awful being a single parent at the time. Between rent and day care, I had only a few hundred dollars a month to feed 3. My 1 bedroom apartment for me and my 2 kids, had mic and my neighbours were clearly dealing in illegally substances.

      In Texas, I have a big house, big yard, and pool, parks, family activities and money left over. I know its not for everybody bit for a homebody who just wants to raise his kids Texas has been good to me.

      --
      "To Err is Human To Forgive is Divine neither of which is Marine Corp Policy"-My SNCOIC
    149. Re:tech is a fairly broad category by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I get recruiter calls all the time, asking me to join some "dynamic company" in the Bay Area.

      Sorry, there is no way in the world I would live out there with the cost of living such as it is; makes it much harder to retire early, and nearly impossible to own a decent home.

      Also, the Silicon Valley corporate culture of 14-hour days and "geek pride" is horrifying and nauseating, and not something that attracts intelligent, experienced people.

    150. Re:tech is a fairly broad category by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's ridiculous.

      You're assuming (a) no student loan, car, or consumer debt (highly unlikely), (b) that the cost of transportation, electricity and heat, Internet access, a mobile phone, and any other basic utilities is $0, and (c) that you don't have to pay any renter's, car, or life insurance premiums (possible, but highly irresponsible).

      $1000 a month after deducting savings, taxes, and rent is a pathetically small sum of money to live on these days for an educated, fully employed person in a high-skill profession. It's not 1980.

    151. Re:tech is a fairly broad category by bonehead · · Score: 4, Interesting

      They think it's a bargain because they are getting more hours, meanwhile less is getting done and it's getting done in the worst possible way.

      It seems that particular idiotic management mentality will never die.

      I had a position a while back where I took over for someone who had the companies entire infrastructure thoroughly messed up. He meant well, just didn't have the slightest clue what he was doing. It took me about 2 weeks to put things in order and automate a large number of tasks. At that point, I could get my job done easily in 4 to 6 hours a day.

      When it came time for my 6 month review, it was mediocre at best, without the pay increase that I had been expecting. My predecessor was held up as a shining example of what they were looking for, since he was hard at work all day, and frequently stayed 2 or 3 hours late in the evening. No mention was made of the fact that their systems were now running smoothly and that the only reason the guy put in so many hours was that it took him that long to come up with even band-aid solutions.

      Needless to say, I moved on to a much better environment shortly thereafter.

      This is the same mentality that prevents telecommuting from being offered even when it would be a great deal for all parties. It's all about being able to "see" you work, with no regard given to the quality of the product of that work.

    152. Re: tech is a fairly broad category by erp_consultant · · Score: 1

      You have taken a similar path to me. I have travelled all over the country and have seen what you describe in varying degrees. We ended up settling in Arizona and love it here. With lower prices for housing and lower taxes compared to many other parts of the country we enjoy a very, very good lifestyle here. Big house, big yard, pool. Incidentally, I worked in Dallas for about a year and really liked it. I could live there.

      I love the Bay Area...been there many, many times on business trips. Great weather most of the year, although it rains too much in the winter for my liking. As you get further inland you get less rain. Incredible variety of topography - ocean, mountains, valleys...you name it. If I had an unlimited budget I would live there in a heartbeat. Everything, and I mean everything, costs more in CA. The biggest problem is the staggering cost of housing. If I were to try and get a home comparable to the one I have now it would probably cost upwards of $3 million in the Bay Area. Sure, I could find one cheaper by moving further away but then you've got to deal with the nightmarish traffic. Yeah, it's nice there...just not THAT nice :-)

    153. Re:tech is a fairly broad category by AK+Marc · · Score: 1

      I am used to being the only non-white when visiting Lockhart, Mineral Wells, Fredericksburg, College Station, and other smaller towns around the state.

      College station isn't that bad, Texas A&M has somewhere around 3.5% black enrollment. In Texas terms, thats a ghetto. And go to San Diego, TX sometime. I was the only white in that town. Though I never made it to Alice to look around the neighboring "city", as opposed to the small town.

      FWIW, the SV offers I received were about double what I got from Austin companies.

      Any from North Dallas? Did you compare actual living costs between the two?

    154. Re:tech is a fairly broad category by AK+Marc · · Score: 1

      Honestly, no matter how much money you make, your expenses will generally balloon to match it, one way or another.

      I had that argument with a complete idiot once. Your income and expenses will match, in all practical cases, unless you hoard cash. If you put it in a "savings account" that's an expense as far as your checking account is concerned. Your budget balances every month, whether you like to or not. Even if your credit card debt is increasing, your budget balances. The problem is that most people don't distinguish between cashflow and P/L.

    155. Re:tech is a fairly broad category by AK+Marc · · Score: 1

      You have to leave the US for that. So even if I named some places, they'd be dismissed because a pale white man from CA who only speaks English wouldn't do well there. But they are out there.

    156. Re:tech is a fairly broad category by t1oracle · · Score: 1

      Screw California. I live in Maryland on the east cost just minutes away from DC the capital of the United States of America. I want my 6 figures, I can program circles around every "senior developer" that's ever been put in charge of me. In fact, they keep handing over their tasks to me.

    157. Re:tech is a fairly broad category by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      >1500 for a two bedroom unit is steep compared to other parts of the country, but hardly unaffordable on $80k/yr.

      It is if you are saving properly for a downpayment and a 401k.

      Lose your sense of entitlement. $80K/year, -20K taxes, -18K rent = $42K/year. You are doing way better than most people.

      So you want to exclude $15K pretax for your retirement and maybe $15K so you can have a downpayment in a few years? You still have $1K/month for food, drink, and fun. You are doing pretty damn well for a young person.

      You left out transportation and utilities. Also, a good chunk of that "food, drink, fun" is spent at the grocery store.

    158. Re:tech is a fairly broad category by AncientPC · · Score: 1

      Any from North Dallas? Did you compare actual living costs between the two?

      I added more details in another response here. I was born and raised in North Dallas, but I really don't like area. When I was job hunting, I only looked for opportunities in Austin, Seattle, or Silicon Valley.

      My family still lives in DFW, and constantly raves about how cheap everything and how low taxes are. Then again, they have never lived anywhere else. To be honest, I felt the same way until I followed my wife to Hawaii and Japan. After living in the heart of other major cities, extended stays in Seattle, and backpacking through Europe, I realized I don't care for the suburban lifestyle anymore.

      So, I'm picking up and moving to SF. Maybe it works out, maybe it doesn't. I've regret missing opportunities in the past, and am not going to make the same mistakes again. I'm not going to live my life on cruise control. This post (cache version) resonates with me a lot.

    159. Re:tech is a fairly broad category by Tamerlin · · Score: 1

      I've lost count of how many times I've joined a new company only to discover that the supposedly senior engineering staff and the technical leads appear to lack even a basic understanding of engineering, and even less of an understanding of quality. They usually are people who are good at spewing technobabble and throwing around names of complex algorithms... but they don't implement them, they just grab someone else's implementation and throw the terms around. They're definitely not top-tier folks. Even giving them credit as mid-tier is very extremely generous, based on the "quality" of their spaghetti. Er, code.

    160. Re:tech is a fairly broad category by mcgrew · · Score: 1

      But obviously I didn't exclude the cost of paying rent in my calculations, because I actually lived there, and actually paid rent! I paid about $1400 for a 1-bd apartment.

      That's insanely expensive. I'm paying $650 per month to rent a two bedroom house with full basement and detached garage in Illinois, my daughter's only paying about $300 or so for a two bedroom apartment in Cincinnatti.

      Your figures are absolute proof that living in SF is incredibly expensive. And note, the price of everything depends on the price of real estate. That grocery store and bar and restaraunt have to pay rent, too. When rents are high, everything is high,

      Someone earning $80k in SF would be worse off than someone earning less than half that here.

    161. Re:tech is a fairly broad category by ClioCJS · · Score: 1

      But the original example was $1500 rent. That's only $250 more than I paid (before refinancing). So that's only a need for $250 * 12 = 3000 post-tax, so.... 5000 pre-tax dollars more. So that would justify $55K instead of $50K, but not $120K like OP mentioned. Now consider I have to pay for house maintenance and an apartment dweller doesn't, and the small $5000 difference starts to shrink.

      --
      -Clio
      Karma: Bad (mostly from not giving a fuck)
      Blog: http://clintjcl.wordpress.com
    162. Re:tech is a fairly broad category by mcgrew · · Score: 1

      This is why Californians cannot comprehend...

      To be fair to the Californians, you're the first one I've seen that actually gets it. Even economists don't -- I elected to take an undergrad economics class in the late seventies, and the three professors (all of whom held PhDs in economics) were trying to tell us that since the third world could live on $1000 per year, we could too.

      I'd just returned from Thailand and gotten out of the air force. In Thailand, $1000 a year was not a bad living. You could rent a bungalow (including woman) for $30 a month, take a taxi anywhere in the country for a dollar, take a bus anywhere for a nickle, feed four at a nice restaraunt for a buck.

      They didn't get it. I called them idiots and walked out to drop the class, with half the class following me. I've had absolutely zero respect for economists and economics ever since, and every time I hear or read anything any economist says, my opinion of economists is strengthened.

      Wealth trickle down? These guys are all on crack. Wealth flows up; the factory owner doesn't create wealth, he controls and aggregates it. His factory floor workers create it.

      Right now corporate profist are at an all time high, would one of you Republicans explain why that isn't trickling down to the worker's paycheck?

      Yep, it's bullshit. Economics is akin to astrology.

      Oh hell, I seem to have digressed and gone off on a tangent. Sorry.

    163. Re:tech is a fairly broad category by bonehead · · Score: 1

      If you're spending $400 a month on health care, you might want to look into correcting whatever it is that has your health in such a pathetic state!

      You're paying per person what it costs me to insure a family of 4. (And, yes, it's a good plan. Low deductible, low copay, no unreasonable restrictions, etc...)

    164. Re:tech is a fairly broad category by Eli+Gottlieb · · Score: 1

      Subtle? It's not all that subtle, dude. Boston has some evil opposite of New York's ethnic neighborhoods. New York is proud of Little Italy, of Harlem, of the Lower East Side, of Queens! Boston... is proud of Southie, Beacon Hill, and the suburbs, where the white working class and white professional elite live. Boston blatantly disdains, Jamaica Plains, Mattapan, Dorchester, and East Boston where most of the city's residents actually live, and GOD HELP YOU if you live in a student area like Allston, Brighton, or Fenway. Cambridge disdains Boston in the same way that monied/industrial classes and academic/technological classes hate each other worldwide. Brookline is too good for Boston and Boston is too good for Brookline at the same time, in a way that I'm officially told has absolutely nothing to do with Brookline being heavily Jewish. Only the people of Somerville seem to care about Somerville, which is ironically, in my opinion, the nicest actual town in the whole damn area.

      Food is expensive, it's impossible to find a doctor when you need one (I literally had a nervous breakdown and could not get a damn doctor's appointment despite having work-supplied insurance), rent is expensive, the weather is crap (particularly because you can't really enjoy the winter weather without going to the countryside). For all they did to encourage biking, I still got flat tires from broken glass when I actually attempted to ride my bike the 3 miles to work straight down Massachusetts Ave instead of taking the bus. The primary social activity of the metro area was going to your favorite pub and getting smashed, which I wouldn't even object to except that the pub "system" of Boston relies on intricate local knowledge of the precise social scene you want to attend and crowd you want to attract. Actually, I do object because I like to go clubbing rather than just get drunk. Even the "geek" activities for non-students largely consisted of "go watch a guy talk about technology while you eat bar appetizers and drink beer". The T also shuts down its various lines at times ranging from 11:30PM to 1AM, making you either go home early every time you go out, find some place to stay, or only go out near where you live anyway.

      And Anime Boston got wrecked last year by someone drunk and someone stoned fighting during the rave while hundreds of overcrowded fellow nerds waited to even get in. The cops got called and the party broke up. GOOD JOB BOSTON!

      Wow, now was that ever a rant to get off my chest. AND DESPITE ALL THIS, native Bostonians will continually insist that they live in "the Hub of the Universe", which is obviously far superior to crappy cities like New York, especially New York, or San Francisco, or anyplace other than Boston or maybe Seattle.

      Obviously these are all First World problems, but boy is Boston ever a depressing place to live outside its 3-4 months of summer.

    165. Re:tech is a fairly broad category by mcgrew · · Score: 1

      Entitlement is about comparing your circumstances to other people.

      No dictionary in the world says that. Well, maybe your own twisted dictionary. An entitlement is simply what you're entitled to and has nothing whatever to do with your circumstances or how you compare them with others.

      Your definition of "worth" is equally incorrect. Is English a second language to you?

    166. Re:tech is a fairly broad category by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      she might have driven it to SF. the parking costs more then her car

    167. Re:tech is a fairly broad category by pnutjam · · Score: 1

      Buying a house in 1998 is way different then buying a house today. I entered the workforce around 1998 and have clawed my way up to almost 60k (family of 7). It doesn't go far, but we are comfortable. I dream of someday being able to buy a house.

      You are two incomes comparing to a single income, not fair.

    168. Re:tech is a fairly broad category by pnutjam · · Score: 1

      I wonder where his down payment came from? If it didn't come from someone else, it certainly didn't come from a 50k year.

    169. Re:tech is a fairly broad category by pnutjam · · Score: 1

      If you have a degree and certs you are either very bad at IT, or very bad at standing up for yourself.
      I guess you might live in a very rural area.

    170. Re:tech is a fairly broad category by ClioCJS · · Score: 1
      The change in buying a house between 1998 and today has nothing to do with the situation discussed by the original poster - $1300 mortgage vs $1500 rent does not justify being broke on $80K more income. I could find an apartment to rent for the same price as my house very easily. I'd have less room, cheaper electrical bills, and no maintenance costs.

      And i'm not comparing 2 incomes to 1. I'm comparing total income. I wasn't working. The $50K was my wife, while I wasn't working. But it could be both of us wokring $25K/yr jobs as well.

      So your comment is quite off. $120K vs $50K. One residence. Number of people in it doesn't really matter -- though I have house maintenance, which mr. "I make $120K and can barely make ends meet with $1500/mo rent" doesn't.

      --
      -Clio
      Karma: Bad (mostly from not giving a fuck)
      Blog: http://clintjcl.wordpress.com
    171. Re:tech is a fairly broad category by pnutjam · · Score: 1

      If healthcare wasn't tied to full time work I could easily handle 2 or 3 admin positions at smaller companies. They end up with a full timer pulling down 30k, hopelessly over their head. Meanwhile I could part-time it and make a living wage. I would be better off and they would be way better off.

      Single payer would open up these opportunites and our economy would explode.
      sorry for the offtopic...

    172. Re:tech is a fairly broad category by pnutjam · · Score: 1

      I agree, I'm just bitter...

    173. Re:tech is a fairly broad category by ClioCJS · · Score: 1

      lol... i'm still bitter anyway! hehehehe

      --
      -Clio
      Karma: Bad (mostly from not giving a fuck)
      Blog: http://clintjcl.wordpress.com
    174. Re:tech is a fairly broad category by monkeykoder · · Score: 1

      You're forgetting $200-$300/mo for utilities. And why should someone that put 4 years into bettering themselves not be paid at least the same if not better than someone that spent the same time in industry?

    175. Re:tech is a fairly broad category by reve_etrange · · Score: 1

      Um, it takes 40 minutes to get from Richmond to Montgomery (i.e. you work at a tech firm in SOMA) on BART, which is the longest possible distance of the commutes I mentioned.

      If the commute is to the Peninsula (but this was about SF) then there are plenty of other options.

      --
      .: Semper Absurda :.
    176. Re:tech is a fairly broad category by lsatenstein · · Score: 1

      If you're a competent programmer and live in the SF Bay Area, wages are definitely not flat, to the point of absurdity. There are kids just coming out of college making $80k or more as a starting salary, and quickly rising up to $120k+ within only a few years of experience.

      Are you one of them? We hear about others, and what the super exceptional person can earn. Normally that wage earner has a doctorate degree to add to his programming skills.

      --
      Leslie Satenstein Montreal Quebec Canada
    177. Re:tech is a fairly broad category by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Some middle management are notoriously non-tech. Most I have met are so terrified about their own positions, that they do not pay the necessary level of attention to the actual job that needs doing. It starts with someone who appears to be working (yakking on the phone, running around disturbing the tech folks) gets noticed and promoted. Never mind the complete lack of technical understanding. These newly promoted managers then only value that which they can see in themselves, pushing incompetence further up the chain. Thank goodness for video games. Blasting some zombies really flushes the stress!

    178. Re:tech is a fairly broad category by n7ytd · · Score: 1

      I guess you might live in a very rural area.

      A lower cost of living in even the most rural of areas of the US can't account for a pay disparity like that. Usually the largest factor in what we call "cost of living" is housing, the cost of food, gas, medical care, and other necessities are not that different across the country; Amazon and Wal-Mart deliver nationwide for the same price.

    179. Re:tech is a fairly broad category by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      A Mexican, Vietnamese, and German walk into a Wal-Mart...

      That's diversity, Texas-style. It's also "diversity" just about everywhere else, too, except in cities like San Francisco, New York, etc.

    180. Re:tech is a fairly broad category by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      $1500-2000 for a two bedroom is only steep outside of the major cities. It's pretty standard for major cities like New York, Boston, DC/Arlington etc. (Chicago being a notable exception.)

      The problem in San Francisco isn't the price. It's the supply. Everybody is flocking to the city, and everybody wants to live in the same yuppie neighborhoods, yet there's very little new development in those neighborhoods. Without adding 5-10 story complexes everywhere, or leveling blocks of extremely dense single-family homes, San Francisco is pretty much built out. The only city as dense as SF is New York, but SF doesn't yet have the money or political desire to build upward. There were plans just a couple of years ago to build a dozen huge residential towers near downtown--near the new transit complex--but all but two fell through. Had those been built, the richer folk would've moved in, creating more space for the engineers elsewhere.

      FWIW, you could buy a 5 bedroom mansion in Hunters Point(a poor neighborhood in SF) for $2000/month. Mission Bay is supposed to be the city planners' answer to the housing crunch, but it's too close to crime and doesn't have that dense, San Francisco vibe that everybody likes. Plus, the transit sucks, largely because buses which traverse poorer neighbors are few and far between, although on paper they're supposed to be well served. I live in a nicer neighborhood and they run like clockwork. Try to go to some less desirable places and they're a major PITA.

    181. Re:tech is a fairly broad category by pnutjam · · Score: 1

      I agree, I was going to tell him to quit tomorrow, he can do better. However, if he is in a very rural area he may not have many employment opportunities and he should line something up or start some freelancing. 20k for IT is inexcusable, harmful to himself and the industry, he should leave IT if he's only worth that much.

    182. Re:tech is a fairly broad category by Machtyn · · Score: 1

      Threat of taxes. Uncertainty with PPACA. Lack of direction and leadership. And we voted this failure in for another 4 years.

      Granted, government isn't the only reason, but its policies, heavy handed regulation, threats, etc, etc, have been a hinderance for the past 6 years and will continue for the next 4 years.

      In reality, the tech world is doing really good compared to other industries, where unemployment is really high. Give it time, our friends on the Hill are going to make us all drones and wards of the State soon enough.

    183. Re:tech is a fairly broad category by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Single payer would push more of the middle class into the poor. If it worked so well, why is Europe failing? Why did Russia fail? And despite the facade, China is also failing.

    184. Re:tech is a fairly broad category by Machtyn · · Score: 2

      Don't forget, the "fiscal cliff" means that those making over $72k will go from paying their unfair share of about 14% to their fair share of about 27%. Don't worry, you're rich. The truly wealthy? Well, they'll go from paying their unfair share of about 35% to their fair share of about 39%.

      There's a reason George Lucas sold his assets before Obama was re-elected. He knows the hammer (and sickle) is coming.

    185. Re:tech is a fairly broad category by CTachyon · · Score: 1

      BTW 80k to start in SF seems pretty horrible considering the cost of living there [...]

      No, that's actually not bad. Online cost of living calculators don't grok SF. When I moved to SF 5 years ago for a tech job I started out on $75k/year, and I did fine for myself living solo. Sure, you're probably going to drop an extra $15k-$20k/year on rent -- I moved into a ~650ft 1BR apartment for $2100/month, a bit of a premium for a good neighborhood -- but Craigslist is booming with roommate offers, and most other living expenses are about the same as other cities. Utilities are less (milder weather), eating out is more (higher wages, trendier places), groceries are the same. Entertainment is less (lots of free/cheap shows) but there's more of it, so you may wind up spending more.

      Beyond rent, the only other thing that's noticeably more expensive than elsewhere is car ownership; parking garage fees of $300/month aren't uncommon if you work downtown and expect to park there every day, and there's the perennial delight of California gas prices if you're moving from out of state. But even before costing out the parking surprise, a $65/month Muni "M" pass is hella cheaper than gas + insurance + maintenance for owning your own car anyway. Throw in a ~$4/month ZipCar annual membership (partially or fully subsidized by some employers) and you can still have access to a car when transit won't cut it; the rental itself runs about $12/hour, which includes the cost of gas, insurance, and all the maintenance headaches. Even without an employer subsidy, that annual ZipCar fee is 1/3 the price of a WoW subscription, i.e. totally worth it at $75k/year.

      --
      Range Voting: preference intensity matters
    186. Re:tech is a fairly broad category by bessie · · Score: 1

      Well, as mentioned, I've been programming for 30 years and have plenty of meaty projects under my belt, always get good reviews from my managers, etc. etc. and I've yet to be offered anything above $150k. BESIDES Apple/Google/Microsoft/Facebook (which are very hard to get into, even if you're good - they want SUPER good) - where are people regularly getting $200K for non-managerial jobs? I have not seen that (or perhaps I've not been demanding it :-) ).

    187. Re:tech is a fairly broad category by bessie · · Score: 1

      PS I mean just base salary - I'm not including the worth of other benefits.

    188. Re:tech is a fairly broad category by pnutjam · · Score: 1

      Because single payer is the sole distinguishing feature between our economy and theirs.
      #sarcasm

    189. Re:tech is a fairly broad category by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      shit. I feel very poor right now.

      Working as an Oracle DBA in southern Sweden.

      Monthly, 40500 SEK for me is:
      ~29000 SEK after taxes
      10000 SEK morgage repayment
      10000 SEK per month cost of living, but this is just food and "stuff we buy monthly" (not toys or luxury items) and doesnt include transport

      You are 13000 SEK better off per month. Thats a lot of money for me.

      1 USD = 6.68 SEK

      not sure about the rest. My wife earns less than me, and I find it a struggle to save money each month because the cost of living is so high.

    190. Re:tech is a fairly broad category by torkus · · Score: 1

      That's NOT a high cost of living area. Using NYC as a comparison, you typically can't get a 2BR for that in the suburbs within commute distance of the city.

      Within NYC? Forget it. Decent areas midtown and downtown you'll pay 4x that. 5-6K. Uptown ~4K.

      Either you're comparing the wrong areas in SF or it's *FAR* more expensive in NYC...

      --
      You can get rich if you own a politician, but you have to be rich to buy one in the first place.
    191. Re:tech is a fairly broad category by micahraleigh · · Score: 0

      If English was not my first language I would consult a dictionary, as you did. Since you consulted a dictionary I wonder if perhaps English is not your first language.

      The true masters of English use words to mean what they want them to mean (like Shakespeare) -sometimes inventing new words.

    192. Re:tech is a fairly broad category by sydbarrett74 · · Score: 1

      Why did Russia fail?

      Military over-expansion, you witless prat.

      --
      'He who has to break a thing to find out what it is, has left the path of wisdom.' -- Gandalf to Saruman
    193. Re:tech is a fairly broad category by suutar · · Score: 1

      but you do need consumers, and the 'best' consumers (in the sense of the ones who are most able to buy stuff) are the ones that are workers... somewhere.
      Of course, it's probably too much to hope that the folks running the companies will realize this before unemployment hits 80%...

    194. Re:tech is a fairly broad category by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You don't have to pay utilities in California if you live near the coast. In fact, any apartment complex built prior to the 80s or 90s probably won't have A/C. At best you get a couple of gas radiators, and you hardly ever need to use them. I remember a heat wave in San Jose several years ago. It actually got into the 100s. San Jose is desert, so usually as long as you have shade the temperature doesn't matter, but once you get into the high 90s or 100s it can get uncomfortable. It was noteworthy because most of the people I knew lived without A/C. It was a tough week, but then things returned to normal.

      San Francisco is even better. The weather is typically in the 60s, with "extremes" in the mid 50s or mid 70s. Year round.

    195. Re:tech is a fairly broad category by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Looking at Craigslist, this just isn't true. You could pay 4x if you wanted to, just like you can in SF. But you don't have to. I realize New York is very expensive (more expensive than San Francisco), but it's one of those things that the locals like to exaggerate. And there's no shortage of rich folk who _choose_ to live in incredibly expensive neighborhoods and buildings which are not, on the whole, indicative of the entire market.

      The median income for most of Manhattan is less than $50k. Those people quite obviously aren't spending 80+% of their income on housing. And not everybody is living in a closet. Most apartments are old, which seem small, but were average and just fine at the last turn of the century.

      You want to see small, come to San Francisco. We have the largest stock of single occupancy residency "hotels" in the country. They were originally built for the poor, laboring class of transient men. Now they're mid-range.

    196. Re:tech is a fairly broad category by Magius_AR · · Score: 1

      Because single payer is the sole distinguishing feature between our economy and theirs. #sarcasm

      Why not? It's apparently the sole dinstiguishing feature between "good healthcare" and "bad healthcare"
      #sarcasm

    197. Re:tech is a fairly broad category by euroq · · Score: 1

      You realize that an hour commute from SF an get you the same?

      --
      Just because the U.S. is a republic does not mean it is not a democracy. Democracy/republic are not mutually exclusive.
    198. Re:tech is a fairly broad category by euroq · · Score: 1

      I have to do ~4 interviews a week here in San Francisco for my company because we're hiring so much. Yes, we need programmers, kids right out of college.

      Not a shot towards you, but only 1/10 get the job, because we are looking for good people. But yes, there are jobs for kids straight out of college.

      --
      Just because the U.S. is a republic does not mean it is not a democracy. Democracy/republic are not mutually exclusive.
    199. Re:tech is a fairly broad category by AK+Marc · · Score: 1

      Having been away from Dallas for a while, I liked it there. The wife would "never live in Texas", so I'll likely never be back, but I grew up a block from Preston and Royal. I'd never be able to live in Preston Hollow again, my parents bought in when it wasn't popular, but since then, developers bought up the entire street and demolished every single house, my $40,000 house (1977 dollars) was replaced with something going for closer to $2,000,000.

      I picked up and moved out of the US. The politics are such that the US is crashing, and nobody will stand up and fix it before it gets to panic levels. It's only about 10 years away now. And I'm much happier hiding somewhere else until the US comes to terms with its credit addiction.

    200. Re:tech is a fairly broad category by Timid+Observer · · Score: 1

      Parent is correct. I also work in the Bay Area for a medium sized software company, and we're constantly starved for talent, and engineers who know what they are doing are in high demand. Hell, even engineers who do not know what they are doing are getting work. You could literally not know how to program, and still get a programming job for $75K if you can at least spell C++.

      I can have difficulty believing this. Another thread here pounded the H1-B strategies of corporations and the gov't. In that thread I didn't get the impression that earnings in this field were so immense and the "shortage" of talent/coders/problem solvers/whatnot is so profound. I wonder what your post and it's parent would come down to if you removed the hyperbole and sarcasm. Seriously, I am interested. Unless the market is closed - xenophobia and the like.

    201. Re:tech is a fairly broad category by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It isn't just tech, it's all industries. Corporate profits are at an all time high, why hasn't any of this money trickled down to the average worker?

      You'd think it was 1925 again.

      ===
      As a retired business owner in Quebec, the provincial tax law was created whereby 7% of the business's net sales had to go towards education. Spend it on education or give it to the government as taxes.
      That 7% included classrooms and classroom tools, courses, external training, etc.

      A typical classroom space rental was easily $2k/mo. Training could include external courses, transportation, hotel, meals and training. The hours an employee participate in a Marketing presentation or seminar also counted against the 7%. Still, many companies spend more than 7% of their net income on education.

  2. Because youre a bunch of cowards by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

    too afraid to ask for the raise, or to leave when they tell you no

    1. Re:Because youre a bunch of cowards by Zeromous · · Score: 1

      In many cases I agree with this....or at least for failing to move out of their 'comfort zone'. I see lots of people who have done the same job (never mind at the same place for almost 15 years). I'm not calling these people cowards, as there's something to be said for comfort... but risk = reward.

      --
      ---Up Up Down Down Left Right Left Right B A START
    2. Re:Because youre a bunch of cowards by Chrono11901 · · Score: 1

      Going to have to second this... I work out of NYC and here its hard to find developers competent in even the most basic OOP fundamentals. Companies are hurting for people... using that to your advantage will make a huge difference in your salary.

      The ironic thing i have noticed... the people who try to lowball you the most are the ones that get pissed when you politely reject their offer.

    3. Re:Because youre a bunch of cowards by coldsalmon · · Score: 0

      At least we're not Anonymous Cowards!

    4. Re:Because youre a bunch of cowards by Narcocide · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Not I, sir. I patiently wait for a raise, then leave when its apparent that I would have to ask to get it.

    5. Re:Because youre a bunch of cowards by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      >> its hard to find developers competent in even the most basic OOP fundamentals

      Oops I'm fluent in, but I ain't gonna brag about it.

    6. Re:Because youre a bunch of cowards by Cutting_Crew · · Score: 1

      I am competent in OOP fundamentals...C++, Java, Objective-C, OpenGL/ES(currently focusing on iOS/Cocoa development) but I am not willing to relocate to NYC from Florida for TONS of reasons. Do you allow people to work from home? Maybe you arent looking for my skills but if you are and you are serious about finding good developers then maybe you would allow telecommute. Just thought i would throw that out there.

    7. Re:Because youre a bunch of cowards by AwesomeMcgee · · Score: 1

      Exactly. We shouldn't have to fight tooth and nail to be shown appreciation for our skills. If the company doesn't give you raises and promotions when you do well for them, they don't care about you, so it's time to jump to another place that might, and get a plump raise while you're at it. Unfortunately the huge swath of MBAs from the 90s when everyone was understanding that's the way to go are in management these days and they were trained back then it's their job to be important and specifically not appreciate others, so you're more likely to end up somewhere else that doesn't appreciate you.

    8. Re:Because youre a bunch of cowards by lightknight · · Score: 1

      Indeed. If companies would actually make decent offers, it would be easier to fill spots.

      --
      I am John Hurt.
    9. Re:Because youre a bunch of cowards by Shados · · Score: 1

      A -lot- of companies (especially big one) allow telecommute. Its just less common for them to allow 100% (or 90%) telecommute, because sometimes being able to talk face to face is faster than setting up the damn teleconferencing and webcams everytime.

      There's still plenty that will allow 100% telecommute....but then salary follows, because those positions are extremely easy to fill. You can just outsource those (massive firm based outsourcing generally gives bad result, but if you pick your offshore ressources the same way you pick local ones, with real interviews and stuff, you can find good ones at a fraction of the price).

      The market for north american remote worker (outside of Montreal and Halifax) is very small, because its generally pointless.

    10. Re:Because youre a bunch of cowards by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      the people who try to lowball you the most are the ones that get pissed when you politely reject their offer.

      Too true. I interviewed in July with a smallish ad startup in Manhattan. They came looking for me, headhunted me via linkedin. I breezed through the phone screens, did well in the on-site interview, and actually even really liked the people and the tech that I heard about - and they made me an offer. But:
      1) They wouldn't budge on remote work;
      2) They offered me a frankly insulting pay rate;

      I live in southern NH (about 45 minutes outside Boston) currently, and to make it a cost-neutral transition, they would have easily had to offer me a 30% or more bump in pay. They offered me a lateral move based on my current base pay (ignoring the 20% yearly bonus I'm eligible for), which translates to a massive pay cut or reduction in standard of living in a move from southern NH to NYC, with a very vague promise that "after I've proved myself, they'd try real hard to bump me up to a better rate."

      I pressed for more money, more specifics, and more details, and told them that they were a good 30-35k too low on the base salary, and they got very huffy that a candidate would be so bold. What they didn't consider was the fact that with 15 years of experience, and a skill set that matched up very closely to what they were looking for, I don't much feel the need to "prove myself" to them - I have enough of a body of work to point to that they can see I know what I'm doing, and I've never had a problem finding a new gig when I get the urge to move to something new.

      And the kicker is, the job is STILL open 6 months later, which tells me either they're incapable of finding someone with the right skill set, or they're completely unreasonable about their expectations of what they need to pay somebody with the requisite skill set. I wouldn't have minded moving to New York, but I'm not going to go to NYC for a pay cut and a large reduction in my standard of living.

    11. Re:Because youre a bunch of cowards by Cutting_Crew · · Score: 1

      If you are software development shop there isnt much need for teleconferencing or webcams. thats what IM is for. And if you absolutely have to have a one on one with a team member then use skype or something. I am on a mobile dev team and we sit almost next to each other and we still use IM. everything from subversion updates to where we want to go to lunch. You could find a great developer such as myself, offer me a bit more money because you dont have to spend resources on business things(electricity, space for me to sit or meal perks to offer). Heck ill even use my personal computer to do the work, so you dont have to even buy me that.

      And when i mean offer me more money i mean more as in less than what you would pay someone who lives in NYC because living in Florida is WAYY less expensive to live in but enough to make me happy as I can stay where I am, dont have to move away from family, can enjoy my 300+ days of sunshine, beaches, etc and can continue to not pay state taxes.

    12. Re:Because youre a bunch of cowards by darkshadow88 · · Score: 1

      I wonder if you interviewed with the same place I did--it was, likewise, an advertising-related startup in Manhattan. I was interviewing for my first job out of grad school, and right after the phone interview (literally within an hour or two), I had the CEO of the company call me practically begging me to work for them. I saw the offer, which I thought looked alright (having not seen any other offers prior to that one), but then I got the offer from my current employer, which was nearly 50% higher. After I turned down the offer and mentioned that I was accepting the other offer, I got three further emails, exceeding the original offer by $10k, $15k, and then $20k (though still well below the other offer). So not only was the offer cheap, but they knowingly offered me WAY less than they were prepared to pay me, hoping I'd take the bait.

      And yes, the position looks to still be open. And not for a lack of qualified applicants--with the way they were fawning over me, I clearly had the right skill set for the job. But you're not going to get an algorithms engineer for cheap.

    13. Re:Because youre a bunch of cowards by Tough+Love · · Score: 1

      ...everything from subversion updates to where we want to go to lunch.

      Subversion, yuck, I hope you asked an extra 10K for that indignity.

      --
      When all you have is a hammer, every problem starts to look like a thumb.
    14. Re:Because youre a bunch of cowards by Cutting_Crew · · Score: 1

      What problems have you had with subversion? we are moving to git but ive never had any issues with SVN, at least in Eclipse.

    15. Re:Because youre a bunch of cowards by Tough+Love · · Score: 1

      Other than doing everything an order of magnitude slower than Git/Mercurial? And being very lame for developing on multiple branches? What's with this "a branch is just a subdirectory" nonsense? Branches aren't subdirectories. Why is every subdirectory polluted with Subversion hidden files, which cause Subversion to fail horribly if not present?

      If your Subversion repository goes offline you are dead in the water. With Git, it's business as usual. When you get working with Git you will be amazed at how the concept of cheap branches changes your workflow for the better. Not sure you really want to do a big change a certain way? No problem, new branch. If it works out you continue, otherwise delete, branches are cheap. Quite starkly different from SVN, where you'd be nuts to have more than half a dozen branches or so, and you think very very carefully before opening a new one or deleting one. It goes on and on. You'll see.

      --
      When all you have is a hammer, every problem starts to look like a thumb.
    16. Re:Because youre a bunch of cowards by bessie · · Score: 1

      *snort* The huge company I'm working for now still uses *gasp* CVS. They want to move to Perforce, but things move very slow there, and they're afraid that changing the versioning software will slow down the development cycle for too long. It really wouldn't - could be done in a snap, at least for people who have used many versioning systems - but they haven't done it yet. Hell, we're still using Bugzilla. *sigh*

    17. Re:Because youre a bunch of cowards by bessie · · Score: 1

      Since you're posting anonymously, would you mind saying what they offered you, and the salary you eventually accepted? I'm curious what people are considering insulting these days, versus acceptable.

    18. Re:Because youre a bunch of cowards by Tough+Love · · Score: 1

      t things move very slow there, and they're afraid that changing the versioning software will slow down the development cycle for too long...

      It sounds like it's already going as slow as possible.

      --
      When all you have is a hammer, every problem starts to look like a thumb.
    19. Re:Because youre a bunch of cowards by euroq · · Score: 1

      I don't think it's reasonable to expect a company to allow remote work. This is coming from someone who did work from home 9/10 days at a previous company. Just because they couldn't find someone to work in the office doesn't mean they are wrong for looking.

      --
      Just because the U.S. is a republic does not mean it is not a democracy. Democracy/republic are not mutually exclusive.
  3. Relative to other incomes... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

    flat is rising.

    1. Re:Relative to other incomes... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Adding to that, they are comparing wages between 2000 and 2011. One is the peak of the dot-com boom, the other is now. If they compared between 2001 and 2011 or 2002 and 2012, they probably will have a different picture.

      Their comparison is like comparing Banker wages between 2007 and 2011 and claiming that bankers are underpaid on a 5 year basis. In the case of bankers, they are paid more than twice average national wage in both 2007 and 2011, but compared to a boom they are not doing as well now.

    2. Re:Relative to other incomes... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The bottom line is that for people that -really- know their stuff and how/where to apply their skill set, there is usually little problem with wages. I would guess that for average, commodity-level programmers that are, well, average in skill set and average in motivation .... and this probably applies to 2/3 of programmer types working for corporations .... salaries are not going to be very spectacular. Sort of like most other industries.

  4. Work Force by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Does anyone have numbers on demand vs IT workforce size over the last couple decades?

    1. Re:Work Force by homey+of+my+owney · · Score: 1

      imo, it has nothing to do with demand. The ill organization, of which there are now many - treat IT, its services, and infrastructure as a cost center. That means that when cuts are needed, IT is the first to get singled out as a burden that nobody wants. It's only till after the damage of this kind of thinking takes place, that the least dumb among them realizes what a big mistake it was.

      Treating IT as an integral part of a robust and growing organization - and salaries, satisfaction, productivity and success will be more prevalent.

    2. Re:Work Force by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So true, the companies that use IT as there advantage and not as a cost will have the edge on competitors

  5. Recession by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Because the economy sucks. Real wages are down, and it's not going to get better any time soon.

    1. Re:Recession by mrsquid0 · · Score: 2

      It is not the current economic problems. Real wages in Canada and the US have not increased since the early 1980s, and in some cases have dropped. We are still paying the price for the deeply flawed economic policies of Reagan and Mulroney.

      --
      Just because you are paranoid does not mean that no-one is out to get you.
    2. Re:Recession by AwesomeMcgee · · Score: 1

      Look further back and you'll see the middle class has been basically flat since ~60s. It's not the presidents, it's the congress (though I admit the presidents mostly haven't helped). Meanwhile the upper classes have had constantly huge increases in % of income compared to the middle class. Moreover the % of americans who are middle class has dropped significantly over that period.

      Simple fact is the economy has slowly been pressed into restructuring over the past 50 years by a bunch of wankers in congress, it's no wonder we're seeing so many extremists these days, look at other countries with middle classes equally small and you'll see the same thing.

    3. Re:Recession by reve_etrange · · Score: 1

      Bullshit. It doesn't take much reading to get a feeling for what's really going on.

      --
      .: Semper Absurda :.
    4. Re:Recession by AK+Marc · · Score: 1

      If you look, you'll see that executive wages skyrocketed in that time. That everyone else's wages were flat proves "trickle down" doesn't work. When everyone's wages rise together, productivity rises faster than it did in that period. It's not the wages that are killing us, it's the income disparity.

  6. Why? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I thought IT wages where higher than most professions to begin with and now have adjusted (downward) to reflect its more realistic value. Also factor in capitalism trying to cut work costs to increase profits.

    1. Re:Why? by mrsquid0 · · Score: 1

      There is some truth to that. IT jobs used to pay significantly more than other jobs that required similar levels of training and skill. Part of what we are seeing now is IT wages coming into line with wages in other industries.

      --
      Just because you are paranoid does not mean that no-one is out to get you.
  7. We're all too busy to answer... by MatthiasF · · Score: 2

    ..so I'll just quickly say, my job sucks!

  8. Because by John+Napkintosh · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Because IT stuff is easy. I mean, you just type some things and click a few buttons, right? That's not hard. Why do you need 100k a year to do that?

    --

    Long signatures suck.
    1. Re:Because by MNNorske · · Score: 1

      Unfortunately I think too many managers seem to agree with your sarcastic comment. Around here our managers are automatically one paygrade higher than than their employees, and more often than not the managers have little to no technical background. And, the further up the management food chain you go the less tech experience or knowledge you find. To the point where our current CIO sounds like the gal in "The IT Crowd" talking about the internet...

    2. Re:Because by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's right, but the big bucks come from knowing which buttons to push and what order to push them in.

    3. Re:Because by tulcod · · Score: 0

      Thanks for sharing, captain obvious.

    4. Re:Because by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Correct every fix is 5 minutes or at least to my IT challenged brain it should be otherwise you dont know what your doing

    5. Re:Because by Tuoqui · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Well IT is fairly easy when everything is working.

      However, when shit hits the fan the skillsets that an IT professional have plus the penchant that most IT Pros have regarding troubleshooting and diagnosis is invaluable. If your website is dead in the water you're not making any money. If your network is breached you arent making money, you may be losing valuable company secrets to your compeditors.

      What is probably on the decline or 'flat' is the guy who takes your computer, wipes the spyware and viruses off it and gives it back to you. People with real IT skillsets are only going to go up.

      --
      09F911029D74E35BD84156C5635688C0
      +2 Troll is Slashdot's way of saying groupthink is confused
    6. Re:Because by RabidReindeer · · Score: 1

      Because IT stuff is easy. I mean, you just type some things and click a few buttons, right? That's not hard. Why do you need 100k a year to do that?

      That's right! All You Have To Do Is...

    7. Re:Because by Chewbacon · · Score: 3, Insightful

      That's for managing existing equipment. It is easy. The real work comes with project planning and execution, having that insight of where you're going and what it'll take to get there and having a backup plan to get out while maintaining your uptime.

      --
      Chewbacon
      The Bible is like Wikipedia: written by a bunch of people and verifiable by questionable sources.
    8. Re:Because by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Because if I push *that* button, you lose $10 million.

    9. Re:Because by egcagrac0 · · Score: 1

      That's actually not obvious to many people not in IT.

      GGP, the reason I need $100k to type stuff and click a few buttons is because the people who need the stuff typed and buttons clicked don't know which stuff needs typing and which buttons need clicking when.

      My value is not my skills, but the combination of my skills and the organization's need for them.

    10. Re:Because by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Do you want to be on call 24/7? Do you want to leave work at work? Do you want to be challenged by a constantly evolving set of rules? Do you want to be compared to someone around the planet that on paper costs 1/4 of your salary, but has not the wisdom of having made most mistakes already? The life style is also fairly sedentary, so you tend to gain weight, but lose many life points for the treadmill that IT is. I have a BSME from a great engineering school, but found few companies that value such skills financially. Half of my College pals have switched from Indust Engr, Civil, Chemical and even me as mechanical Engr to IT work.

    11. Re:Because by Yvanhoe · · Score: 1

      So easy that you don't even have to be employed to find work. Most of the people I know working in the IT and of my generation (early thirties) have walked the plank and are now freelances. In my case it was a double on the salary. (which I actually used to work half of the time)

      --
      The Wise adapts himself to the world. The Fool adapts the world to himself. Therefore, all progress depends on the Fool.
    12. Re:Because by darjen · · Score: 1

      As a senior Java developer, I must be in one of those skill sets. I took a job two years ago with what I thought was a decent wage. And it was in the company's range. And now the similar jobs I see posted are making 10-15k more than me.

    13. Re:Because by aaarrrgggh · · Score: 1

      Which again gets to declining or flat salaries in maturing industries. We went from the era of "windows for workgroups" to the Internet in the course of five years; we went from fully siloed departments, systems, and applications to interoperable standards. We got past the betas, past the 1.0s, and on to stable products. We even got GUIs that worked!

      I remember the joy of my first Linux install. Joy might not be the right word. Today you can get a VM up and running in no time to try different permutations to see what works best.

    14. Re:Because by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Because the revenues, savings, and high returns on investments are due to IT.
      It used to cost millions to test an engine's characteristics and aero dynamics in wind tunnels. Now it can be done on a cheap cluster and with better results.
      The problem though is that you rarely see that money "trickle down" because it is always used to prop up waste elsewhere.

    15. Re:Because by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Sarcasm meter broken much?

    16. Re:Because by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Indeed. Let's not also forget knowing what will happen when you click the button, and when not to click it.

    17. Re:Because by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Because IT stuff is easy. I mean, you just type some things and click a few buttons, right? That's not hard. Why do you need 100k a year to do that?

      Well shit...

      Everyone in my department has their own specialization, and alot of them are constantly studying to expand their skill set. I never thought that we could throw all thow out if we just clicked on buttons and typed stuff

    18. Re:Because by tulcod · · Score: 1

      Everyone on this site is in IT, so what is the added value of AC's comment?

    19. Re:Because by Xyrus · · Score: 1

      Because IT stuff is easy. I mean, you just type some things and click a few buttons, right? That's not hard. Why do you need 100k a year to do that?

      Because I know what to type and I know what buttons to press.

      I know you're being sarcastic, but this same argument could be used for anything from subway operators to nuclear plant operators.

      --
      ~X~
    20. Re:Because by egcagrac0 · · Score: 1

      Everyone on this site is in IT

      Really?

      Most of the posts I see come from developers. At least in the shop I'm at, developers aren't (usually) considered IT.

      Metaphor: The guys who designed a car aren't IT - they're engineering. The mechanics who do the oil changes and respond to issues ("what's that clunking noise when I turn?") are IT.

      Yes, there is some crossover between departments, but (at the shop I work in ) IT is responsible for keeping the things (computers, networks, printers, telephones) working at defined agreed levels; engineering adds features and capabilities to components that can then be used by IT.

      Your shop may be different.

  9. If cleaning toilets is so important... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    ... why do they earn so little? Nobody wants dirty toilets.

    1. Re:If cleaning toilets is so important... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I do feel like the keyboard janitor sometimes.

    2. Re:If cleaning toilets is so important... by betterunixthanunix · · Score: 3, Insightful

      People might confuse you for some sort of communist if you keep talking like that...

      No really, part of the issue here is that if one underpaid worker tries to demand better compensation, they'll just be replaced with someone else who doesn't mind the low compensation. People are trained from an early age to believe that janitorial work deserves low pay, and so if they are looking for a job cleaning toilets they generally expect low pay.

      --
      Palm trees and 8
    3. Re:If cleaning toilets is so important... by cod3r_ · · Score: 2

      Also doesn't require a degree or certifications or in most cases the ability to even speak english.

    4. Re:If cleaning toilets is so important... by fermion · · Score: 3, Interesting
      Exactly. Wages have to due with such things as barriers to entry, need and ability to supervise, as well as skill set. Importance of job seldom has anything to do with it. For example, executive officers are not necessarily paid well because they have important jobs, but because they they are dishonest, cannot be effectively supervised, and so they are paid high amounts to not screw the firm.

      Cleaning staff, however, can be easily supervised, intimidated, and if they do not do a good job the repercussions are limited. There is also a low barrier to such a job.

      What I think has happened, particularly in the past 10 years, is that software used to track IT resources has become very sophisticated. It has made it possible for the real software development to be executed by the average person. It has also allowed automated supervision IT staff. More business rules are encoded in the management packages.. In the 80's and 90's one had to have trust that the person who was working IT. Now the tools are there to not only check on the developer daily, but automated difficult tasks.

      So just like any other industry, automation has made highly skilled workers redundant. We no longer need a tailor to make our clothes. Anybody off the street can cook your food. Modern check out registers means that we no longer need have trust in our cashiers. And since so much IT is simply clicking icons and plugging things into other things, with measures taken to insure they cannot be plugged in wrong, there is really no reason a semi-literate person off the street can't be successful with minimal training.

      --
      "She's a scientist and a lesbian. She's not going to let it slide." Orphan Black
    5. Re:If cleaning toilets is so important... by cyber-vandal · · Score: 1

      Which IT is simply clicking icons and plugging things into other things? There's still plenty of coding required even in my Dynamics CRM role and that does have a lot of clicking icons and dragging and dropping.

    6. Re:If cleaning toilets is so important... by AwesomeMcgee · · Score: 2

      Spoken like someone who's never seen a successful software company go under because years of junior developers made the system more and more impossible to maintain to the point that clients had to be told their defects were either unfixable or would take 6 months to fix at which point the clients went somewhere else. Yeah, unskilled workers can do the job just greeaaaat.... Good luck with that.

    7. Re:If cleaning toilets is so important... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Simple, your software runs on an arbitrary number of targets, your toilet attendant runs a handful of toilets.

    8. Re:If cleaning toilets is so important... by reve_etrange · · Score: 2

      if one underpaid worker tries to demand better compensation, they'll just be replaced with someone else

      This is, in a nutshell, why capital wants high unemployment. The larger the reserve labor force, the faster uppity punks get replaced.

      --
      .: Semper Absurda :.
    9. Re:If cleaning toilets is so important... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Really IT consists of simply clicking icons and plugging things into other things ? Just what exactly do you do for a living ?

    10. Re:If cleaning toilets is so important... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Its got nothing to do with expectations. Its all supply and demand. Everyone is qualified to clean toilets, not many can code. Not many can lead hundreds of people either so they can demand higher pay in the open market.

    11. Re:If cleaning toilets is so important... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      except for the whole "profit" part, retard. If I can sell 1000 iGidgets at $10 profit, I do a lot better than selling 100 at $5 profit. However, stagnant wages certainly do wonders for promoting progressive politics. Who's got some power to gain there?

    12. Re:If cleaning toilets is so important... by SecurityTheatre · · Score: 1

      There is both supply AND demand in the equation.

      There is a high demand for toilet cleaners, there is also, however, a very high supply, especially when unemployment is high.

      Anyone who can qualify as sentient and has two hands can clean a toilet, or at least be trained to do so in a short amount of time.

      Building a multithreaded application database parsing engine, on the other hand, is not something very many people can do quickly or well, no matter how much training is provided.

    13. Re:If cleaning toilets is so important... by L4t3r4lu5 · · Score: 1

      A junior dev is NOT an unskilled worker.

      Come back when you have made your analogy work with the bin man, or a school cook.

      --
      Finally had enough. Come see us over at https://soylentnews.org/
    14. Re:If cleaning toilets is so important... by AwesomeMcgee · · Score: 1
      I was responding to the above poster claiming:

      there is really no reason a semi-literate person off the street can't be successful with minimal training.

      I agree 100% a junior dev is not an unskilled worker, so given that; how bad would the unskilled worker the above poster is suggesting do in the same situation? You and I agree on this point; an unskilled worker cannot do this job to any relevant level, and the above poster is just trying to elevate himself by claiming others to be of such low skill that we engineers are replaceable by the bin man.

    15. Re:If cleaning toilets is so important... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ummm neither does IT

    16. Re:If cleaning toilets is so important... by shentino · · Score: 1

      Lowering costs and thus raising profits eh?

      Seems that the quid of lower IT wages should be offset by increased competition as a pro quo?

      One of the theorems of supply economics is that profit attracts competition.

      So long as that's actually the case, I don't mind IT wages going down.

    17. Re:If cleaning toilets is so important... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Which is exactly where many IT projects end up. However the root cause is never understood by management. Next time round, they try to do the project better by spending even less on IT staff, cos a successful project is one that looks good on paper, and you blame the IT guy when it fucks up. Win win situation for manager, who then gets another contract regardless, cos he has a fine reference for bringing in projects under budget, and making hard decisions on staffing.

  10. Because income growth is shifting. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Income growth has been shifting since the late 1990s from middle class to upper-middle and wealthy class.

    In fact in many sectors, incomes have been shrinking for those in lower management and below. Meanwhile, incomes of upper management (i.e. CEOs, University administrative staff) - basically people who really don't work or anything productive - have been sky rocketing.

    IT is very important... but as a CEO I don't want to pay a lot for it.

    1. Re:Because income growth is shifting. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      University administrative board staff

      I fixed that for you !

    2. Re:Because income growth is shifting. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      It's been going on for much longer than that. Wages as a percent of GDP are at record lows while corporate profits are at record highs, and we all know who gets ~all of those profits.

      BTW, unless you're a university President, Dean, Provost, etc. you're paid next to nothing and many of those staff are mission critical. I can't imagine any university functioning for very long without the staff that help researchers through the grant application process for example.

    3. Re:Because income growth is shifting. by reve_etrange · · Score: 1

      Actually the corporate profit rate is not at record high, far from it. The unbalanced growth over the past 40 years has enriched a very few, but has not led to economic stability or robust businesses.

      --
      .: Semper Absurda :.
  11. Because of the old adage... by stevegee58 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Engineers are the dumbest smart people in the world.

    1. Re:Because of the old adage... by Alarash · · Score: 1

      I always figured that an engineer is somebody who intrinsically understand what he does, and how it's done, all the inner workings of a technology. I don't think this applies to most IT departments.

    2. Re:Because of the old adage... by Narcocide · · Score: 2

      Well, there are a lot of hidden truths to this statement, but the biggest one is that intelligent people as a whole *tend* not to exhibit the same sort of ruthless pack mentality that the less-than-genius but more socially-competent crowd does. This makes it hard to get ahead in business after years of academia where (unlike school) your promotion is not purely performance-based but *usually* almost implicitly popularity-based, instead. Geeks are good at doing the job well and knowing that they did. They are not good at making everyone else around them who couldn't do it as easily feel good about it after the fact.

    3. Re:Because of the old adage... by StripedCow · · Score: 1

      Indeed, if they were smarter, they would have become lawyers.

      --
      If Pandora's box is destined to be opened, *I* want to be the one to open it.
    4. Re:Because of the old adage... by jandrese · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I attribute that quote to one of those Wall Street types or sales guys who measure their success entirely by the size of their paycheck. "That engineer only makes $80k and has a tough job that required a complex degree with lots of math in it! What a maroon!" The engineer looks at the Wall Street guy making 3/4 of a million per year and goes "That guy hates his job, is always stressed out, works 90 hours every week, has no hobbies because his job is his life, any family he has he barely sees, it's kind of sad. Why make so much money if you won't get to spend it until after you're all burnt out?"

      Plus the Engineer gets the satisfaction of actually being productive and making something instead of just being a leeching middleman. And no, "liquidity" is not a product.

      --

      I read the internet for the articles.
    5. Re:Because of the old adage... by PRMan · · Score: 1

      And made $70K instead of $120K.

      --
      Peter predicted that you would "deliberately forget" creation 2000 years ago...
    6. Re:Because of the old adage... by PRMan · · Score: 3, Insightful

      But they are only dumb to people who think wealth is the key to happiness. Most engineers I know are smarter than this and simply want an above-average job where they aren't worked to death and have family time. This makes them happy.

      --
      Peter predicted that you would "deliberately forget" creation 2000 years ago...
    7. Re:Because of the old adage... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      While I may agree with some of the assessments, but I have issue with the social-incompetence of engineers and scientists. The problem may be that engineers overthink things. I see it as a sign of both analytic capabilities as well as potentially higher levels of empathy. Yes that's right, a very human emotion. I might also make a stretch that the sociopath-type CEO's and Wall Street exec's just don't care about the "rest of them", if it makes them feel any better they just say that engineers don't have social graces. The fact is those financially successful type are more ruthless, manipulative, and unethical. If that is a sign of better social acumen, then let me be silenced.

    8. Re:Because of the old adage... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      More and more I consider this silly geek job where I am dependent on a large number of highly specialized people to produce a highly specialized product that needs highly specialized customers that have a large dependency on similarly specialized people, a bloody fucking liability.

    9. Re:Because of the old adage... by stymy · · Score: 1

      Sounds like you don't realize plenty of jobs require advanced math and pay far better than engineering. I'm an actuary, living in Bermuda. Last year I made over $600 000, and I expect to get a nice raise this year. I also don't do overtime. For what it's worth, I think my job is valuable. I simply do life insurance.

    10. Re:Because of the old adage... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      actuary.... "advanced math"... LOL.

      you probably work for criminals.

    11. Re:Because of the old adage... by Kjella · · Score: 1

      The engineer looks at the Wall Street guy making 3/4 of a million per year and goes "That guy hates his job, is always stressed out, works 90 hours every week, has no hobbies because his job is his life, any family he has he barely sees, it's kind of sad. Why make so much money if you won't get to spend it until after you're all burnt out?"

      Or you could just become a video game developer, where you hate your job, is always stressed out, works 90 hours every week, has no hobbies because your job is your life, and family you have you barely see, it's kind of sad but at least you're not making 3/4 of a million per year. A lot of people project that he must hate his job because they'd hate his job, when in fact they don't. I've been briefly in the financial industry and I think many of them plain like it, they feel it's a battle of wits against the other investors in the market and they love coming out on top. Where the engineer wants to play a game of chess the wall street guy would much rather sit down at a texas hold'em poker table and read other players or pull off stone cold bluffs.

      They like it so much they want to get better at it even if the job doesn't technically require it, just like developers who go home and write more code or learn more about software development. I'm met a few people with enough money they could retire today and life very comfortably the rest of their lives, you really think they're at work because they hate it there? They like it, they're gamblers at heart so why would they stop getting their kicks in their day job? Of course there's a lot of overworked, underpaid junior staff that are just hoping to some day make that 3/4 of a million, but the people that hate it don't last long just like all the non-IT people looking to make a quick buck on the dotcom wave.

      --
      Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
    12. Re:Because of the old adage... by germansausage · · Score: 3, Informative

      Years and years ago, when Michael Dell was maybe about 30, they asked him why he didn't sell Dell, retire, and have some fun. His answer was "What could possibly be more fun than running a billion dollar computer company?"

    13. Re:Because of the old adage... by adolf · · Score: 1

      I'm an actuary, living in Bermuda. Last year I made over $600 000, and I expect to get a nice raise this year.

      Banker!

    14. Re:Because of the old adage... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Let's see: 750k is about ~430k after taxes in my state.

      I live off of 20k now, but let's just increase it to 80k because why not?

      At 6.5% return, ignoring effect of taxes, I could have 2.2 mill saved up in 5 years and be done and retired.

      I'll be a Wall Street guy please.

    15. Re:Because of the old adage... by Stiletto · · Score: 1

      I attribute that quote to one of those Wall Street types or sales guys who measure their success entirely by the size of their paycheck. "That engineer only makes $80k and has a tough job that required a complex degree with lots of math in it! What a maroon!" The engineer looks at the Wall Street guy making 3/4 of a million per year and goes "That guy hates his job, is always stressed out, works 90 hours every week, has no hobbies because his job is his life, any family he has he barely sees, it's kind of sad. Why make so much money if you won't get to spend it until after you're all burnt out?"

      The difference being:

      The engineer will have to keep doing that $80K job until the day he dies, and he'll still be just barely above comfortable.

      The banker only has to hold his nose and do that stressful burnout work for about 5 years or so, at which point he's saved millions, and due to his background can "retire" into a cushy CFO or director of accounting role. He now still makes much more than the engineer, but is working fewer hours and has millions in "cushion" should he want to go start a company or something.

    16. Re:Because of the old adage... by petervandervos · · Score: 1

      Indeed. I have heard it called the beta paradox. If you have a job you like, create some nice, useful things in it. Can go home on normal times (on average) what more does one need?

    17. Re:Because of the old adage... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      A 6.5% return? Haha, you're funny.

  12. And what about other sectors? by SirGarlon · · Score: 2

    How does this compare with other employment sectors? Adjusted for inflation, real median household income in the United States went down between 1990 and 2010.

    --
    [Sir Garlon] is the marvellest knight that is now living, for he destroyeth many good knights, for he goeth invisible.
    1. Re:And what about other sectors? by Archangel+Michael · · Score: 2

      I'm calling it the Bush / Obama economy And I don't see any real improvement coming either. I haven't seen a COLA in years, but on the other hand, I'm grateful I have a job when so many people don't.

      --
      Agent K: A *person* is smart. People are dumb, stupid, panicky animals, and you know it.
    2. Re:And what about other sectors? by reve_etrange · · Score: 2

      You should call it the Kennedy / Johnson / Nixon / Ford / Carter / Reagan / Bush / Clinton / Bush / Obama economy. Seriously, the basic economic policy in the US has not changed at all, only the delivery mechanisms (jobs programs vs. interest rate vs. tax cuts).

      I highly recommend you read this paper. Even if you disagree with Brenner's conclusions, the historical data should be enlightening.

      --
      .: Semper Absurda :.
    3. Re:And what about other sectors? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I read the comments on this article just to see how long it would take before someone stated the obvious. Wow - quite a ways down.

  13. Because Tech is global... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    and you guys in US (and EU) are way overpaid in the global scale.

    1. Re:Because Tech is global... by alexander_686 · · Score: 1

      And scalable.

      Telcoms allow a worldwide workforce.
      Technology has been allowing to leverage up IT staff so you need fewer of them.

      Two trends that offer feedback on themselves.

  14. Foreign pressure by sethstorm · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Get rid of the guest workers and offshore pressure, then wages can rise.

    --
    Twitter supports and protects racists - by smearing their critics with the "Hate Speech" label.
    1. Re:Foreign pressure by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Get rid of the huge number of useless, incompetent managers and frequent contracting out of useless programs meant to increase employee performance, then wages can rise.

            There, fixed that for you.

    2. Re:Foreign pressure by im_thatoneguy · · Score: 2

      I highly doubt this is the problem. At our company we will hire anyone who is really good at what they do. There simply aren't that many people. The US is cranking out people with degrees who pretty much suck. The rest of the world isn't doing any better but if you have 8B people pick from inevitably a good number are really good.

      I look at our company and others and the guest workers are all there because they were better than the domestic applicants. Some of whom are not only better but unique and nearly irreplaceable. And they get paid as such. If they are here or working overseas --either way they would get paid very well.

      As to wages... well our wages have been pretty stagnant at our company--but we haven't laid off anyone and we've increased in size. And since we added entry level people I would guess that our average wages actually decreased due to expansion on the low-end.

      I think that's another factor to consider--there are a lot of people entering the job market. So you're going to see a larger diversity of talent and pay to go along with it.

    3. Re:Foreign pressure by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      When was the last time schools cranked out people who didn't suck, and/or require training? When was the last time companies offered training?

    4. Re:Foreign pressure by 0111+1110 · · Score: 1

      At our company we will hire anyone who is really good at what they do.

      Bullshit. So you'd hire someone with no professional programming experience and no college degree? I don't believe you.

      --
      Quite an experience to live in fear, isn't it? That's what it is to be a slave.
    5. Re:Foreign pressure by Lando · · Score: 1

      Most companies won't even look at you if you don't have a degree. Are you saying that your company is different?

      --
      /* TODO: Spawn child process, interest child in technology, have child write a new sig */
    6. Re:Foreign pressure by im_thatoneguy · · Score: 1

      Bullshit. So you'd hire someone with no professional programming experience and no college degree? I don't believe you.

      I started working for them while in college. When I had to change schools (due to my college closing) the founder offered me a raise if I would drop out and stick around.

      Degrees here are irrelevant. I've sat in on a lot of interviews and never once was a person's degree asked about. There are plenty of people with degrees who suck and plenty who are great and dropped out.

    7. Re:Foreign pressure by im_thatoneguy · · Score: 1

      Most companies miss out on a lot of really talented people because they're looking for a cookie cutter checklist instead of focusing on talent and personality.

      We first and foremost want to see what people can do. And if they're great at what they do we want to see that they will fit in well with the culture. Degrees or transcripts have never been requested during an interview. In fact when I left the company to finish up my degree my exit interview included an offer for a raise/full time if I dropped out of school instead of leaving.

    8. Re:Foreign pressure by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I highly doubt this is the problem. At our company we will hire anyone who is really good at what they do. There simply aren't that many people. The US is cranking out people with degrees who pretty much suck. The rest of the world isn't doing any better but if you have 8B people pick from inevitably a good number are really good.

      I look at our company and others and the guest workers are all there because they were better than the domestic applicants. Some of whom are not only better but unique and nearly irreplaceable. And they get paid as such. If they are here or working overseas --either way they would get paid very well.

      As to wages... well our wages have been pretty stagnant at our company--but we haven't laid off anyone and we've increased in size. And since we added entry level people I would guess that our average wages actually decreased due to expansion on the low-end.

      I think that's another factor to consider--there are a lot of people entering the job market. So you're going to see a larger diversity of talent and pay to go along with it.

      Are you REALLY arguing that easy access to limitless (yes, H1-B limits are per year and thus holders accumulate) foreign labor isn't a downward force on domestic wages just because the domestic labor pool sucks? Supply? Demand? Ever heard of them?

    9. Re:Foreign pressure by jmcvetta · · Score: 1

      So you'd hire someone with no professional programming experience and no college degree?

      I would, if he were good at programming. The hard thing for such an applicant would be demonstrating his skill. But open source projects make that possible. "Show me your github" is the new mantra I hear around the Valley.

    10. Re:Foreign pressure by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      At our company we will hire anyone who is really good at what they do. [...] I look at our company and others and the guest workers are all there because they were better than the domestic applicants. [...] well our wages have been pretty stagnant at our company [...]

      You never put these things together, did you?

      The "guest workers" probably aren't better, on average, than available "domestic" workers, it's just that the guest workers are willing to work at a company that has stagnant wages, and domestic workers aren't. Because the guest workers have to be working somewhere, or leave the country -- and that is the extra incentive that your company can provide the guest workers without effecting the bottom line, and it can't offer it to the domestic workers since domestic workers won't get thrown out of the country.

      Oh, and I wonder how many of those "guest workers" have degrees from US universities... you know, those institutions you said are churning out people with degrees who pretty much suck. Or do only American citizens suck, while non-Americans with the same degrees from the same place don't suck?

    11. Re:Foreign pressure by mini+me · · Score: 1

      Maybe in other industries. Tech companies don't care. Not even big ones like Google and Apple.

      (To be fair, Google cared about a decade ago, but they don't anymore)

    12. Re:Foreign pressure by Stiletto · · Score: 1

      As far as tech goes, the only company that seems to care about your educational credentials or grades is Google, and maybe the defense guys / government contractors. The rest will hire you if you can at least spell C++.

    13. Re:Foreign pressure by im_thatoneguy · · Score: 1

      Well, wages are tied pretty much directly to profit here so the stagnant wages is directly tied to the fact that we didn't make much money.

      And admittedly I work at two places right now and the stagnant wages is one company while my freelancing with a second company is the one who has the resources to hire foreign workers. And I would emphasize *resources*. I know a couple of the guys they convinced to move to the states. They are not taking a pay cut--they're taking senior positions because they possess unique skills in my industry and are well known world wide. That's why they were hired, in *spite* of the cost of relocating them to the US and dealing with the hassle.

      America has a history of attracting the world's top minds. I would rather have people coming to America and starting the next Google here than taking the idea back to Europe, China or India.

    14. Re:Foreign pressure by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Most companies won't even look at you if you don't have a degree. Are you saying that your company is different?

      Not sure where you're getting this from.

      I've had a nice, comfortable, successful career in IT and I don't have a degree. Hell, even if I had completed the degree I started, it was only for an associates degree from a 2 year business school.

      Never once in 25 years in IT has education been an issue when I've been job hunting. Pretty much all job ads *say* they require a degree. That never stops me from submitting my resume, and it doesn't stop me from getting interviews and job offers.

      If you're good at what you do and have a solid track record to back that up, education is irrelevant. (Irrelevant to the point that it's tempting to classify getting a degree as a waste of time and money.)

  15. Cry me a river. by westlake · · Score: 4, Insightful

    The median household income in the US is $52,000 USA Quick Facts

    1. Re:Cry me a river. by roboticon · · Score: 0

      The question is about change in wages, not absolute wages. If IT wages started higher but have remained flat, why is that?

    2. Re:Cry me a river. by vlm · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Yeah but the national median level of education, training, and experience is only slightly above a zoo monkey, so only getting paid a tiny bit more for knowing a heck of a lot more seems a bit out of proportion.

      --
      "Science flies us to the moon. Religion flies us into buildings." - Victor Stenger
    3. Re:Cry me a river. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      He said household wages.

      A tech household with both adults working could easily be getting 3x the average.

    4. Re:Cry me a river. by hamster_nz · · Score: 1

      It isn't how much you know, it is how much value you add. Improvements in IT are rarely creating massive improvements in productivity.

      The majority of productivity gains in areas such as manufacturing have already been made a decade or so ago, before we reached this age of oversupply of CPU, RAM and disk.

    5. Re:Cry me a river. by vlm · · Score: 1

      That seems very optimistic compared to my experience. The more the IT screws are tightened down and centrally controlled, the more the computer turns into a dumb machine like a typewriter with manual repetitive data entry and hand calculation and using the wrong tool for the job.

      I've made a pretty good living doing what amounts to systems analysis and integration, and workflow automation. Its really awful out there, but with a good eye its easy to make a living making it better.

      --
      "Science flies us to the moon. Religion flies us into buildings." - Victor Stenger
    6. Re:Cry me a river. by vlm · · Score: 1

      both adults working

      The steadily increasing population and steadily decreasing population workforce participation rate means that'll take care of itself soon enough. To say nothing of the 50% divorce rate, etc.

      --
      "Science flies us to the moon. Religion flies us into buildings." - Victor Stenger
    7. Re:Cry me a river. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah but the national median level of education, training, and experience is only slightly above a zoo monkey, so only getting paid a tiny bit more for knowing a heck of a lot more seems a bit out of proportion.

      Out of proportion to the same extent the CEO wages are out of proportion to the average wages of the people who work for them? Didn't think so.

      Where is Occupy Overpaid Executives when you need them?

    8. Re:Cry me a river. by AwesomeMcgee · · Score: 2

      Actually birthrates are at a 90 year low, no longer making up for population loss. That is actually a much bigger problem than population gain, and is endemic of the lowering % of americans who are capable of being in the middle class and lack of social programs to support families which have taught people having children is more trouble than it's worth.

    9. Re:Cry me a river. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      And in the meantime, as a customs broker, I deal with so much data and having to understand and use the ENTIRE GODDAMN CUSTOMS TARIFF CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM, let alone any cross country tax laws, GST intricacies, SIMA charges, and a multitude of other nuances that come up when things go back and forth between countries. And not just USA... shit comes in from any country that exports things.

      And it's not just about you having a batchelor's degree... I've got my own certification for this shit too.

      And yet I'd still absolutely KILL in order to get half of what the average IT worker gets.

      Suck it up princess, not everyone who needs to know a lot makes 6 digits a year.

    10. Re:Cry me a river. by DaveV1.0 · · Score: 2

      The average CEO salary is over $165,000 per year. That doesn't include benefits, bonuses, and stock options. Adding those and total compensation can shoot to well over $1 million a year.

      --
      There is no "-1 offended" or "-1 you don't agree with me" mod options for a reason.
    11. Re:Cry me a river. by reve_etrange · · Score: 1

      And the GDP per capita is $48,000...so if the income were distributed evenly, the average family of four should be pulling in something like $200,000 big ones.

      --
      .: Semper Absurda :.
    12. Re:Cry me a river. by westlake · · Score: 2

      Yeah but the national median level of education, training, and experience is only slightly above a zoo monkey...

      The numbers tell a different story. Educational attainment in the United States

      "Zoo monkey."

      I don't believe I've ever heard the geek's contempt for other trades, crafts and professions expressed quite so clearly as this. It certainly helps to explain his boundless sense of entitlement.

    13. Re:Cry me a river. by MalleusEBHC · · Score: 1

      Actually, poorer women tend to have higher birth rates. Education and access to contraception are two of the most relevant factors in a lower birth rate, and these are woefully lacking for most poor American women. I found this Census Bureau paper with some data from 2006 showing that women in lower income brackets have much higher birth rates.

    14. Re:Cry me a river. by mini+me · · Score: 1

      Economics says that jobs that have a shortage of labour will be paid more. Businesses struggling to find labour will have to resort to hiring just about anyone who can show some semblance of being able to do the job. So the irony here is that in a free market, those with more education (and stick to that area) will be paid less than those with less education.

      Of course most labour shortages are a result of non-free markets governed by credentialism (think health care workers, lawyers, etc.) so people are easily confused about what role education really plays.

    15. Re:Cry me a river. by Captain+Hook · · Score: 1

      Couldn't a computer do most of that?

      --
      These comments are my personal opinions and do not necessarily reflect the opinions of the other voices in my head.
    16. Re:Cry me a river. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Right, because our culture values things like education, training and experience.

    17. Re:Cry me a river. by AwesomeMcgee · · Score: 1

      I'm aware of that; but why are the more affluent not having children? It's because they have the option and choose not to, why do they choose not to? Because they know well that they will get no support for the extra cost (the child tax credit doesn't count, seriously that pays for ~1 month of having the kid for the whole year) or the extra time it takes to properly raise the child.

    18. Re:Cry me a river. by Richard+Dick+Head · · Score: 1

      Lack of social programs? I'm sorry I think it's the other way around. How many of you out there have suffered in your youth because you were forced to spend your precious time in a mind prison with the dross of society taunting and molesting you with no need to worry of reproach? Most of you? I turned to drugs and alcohol in my high school days and some time thereafter and it set me back quite a few years.

      People have it backwards. You NEED to be able to hit bottom. How else do you learn? Why do you think we have ghettos? Which I would define as "area of people with a toxic support system that will not let them fail and learn from their mistakes"

      The reason US schools suck is because you don't have to WORK HARD to get in past grammar school. You are given it and you don't deserve it. Why else do you think our country's society sucks?
       
      The only people really winning the game big are the sociopaths, as they have their own emotional walled garden and are immune and in fact inspired to more grotesque greatness in this terrible system we exist in. While the rest of us with a little less than a free ride get lost in the cess pool of human garbage.

      In order for the world to get better, you can't pity people. Pity is the weapon of the addict, the loafer, the emotional vampire, the person who hasn't had their ass handed to them and hasn't had the opportunity to really "get it".

  16. Quit complaining- staying even is good these days by Roblimo · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Most middle or working class occupations are suffering from *declining* pay. Holding steady is good these days. And think of all the people who were making $50K or $75K a few years ago and are now working for $10/hour or less.

    Here, I'll help:

    1... 2.... 3... 4... 5... 6...

    Count your blessings! :)

  17. Oblig, Bill Clinton by Kittenman · · Score: 1

    It's the economy, stupid.

    --
    "The greatest lesson in life is to know that even fools are right sometimes" - Winston Churchill
  18. Commodity IT workers by Stonefish · · Score: 1

    Management is attempting to commoditise the IT workform however this relates to a fundamental misunderstanding of what IT is meant to do. IT is meant to either replace or augment people. Paying peanuts to commoditise your workforce and using BA to provide the insight is an attempt to apply Taylors principles to this problem. However it doesn't work in practice. Business needs to employ evolutionary models of software and system design and employ capable practictioners.
    Rule 1 If you can innovate
    Rule 2 If you can copy the most successful innovators.
    Rule 3 Don't pay for software unless you absolutely have to.

    Look at what google, facebook etc are doing and contrast this to your environment. If you're a MS shop, your doing it wrong because the software is not free. You're paying an overhead that you don't have to and licencing constrains your growth.

    1. Re:Commodity IT workers by PRMan · · Score: 2

      If you're a MS shop, your doing it wrong because the software is not free. You're paying an overhead that you don't have to and licencing constrains your growth.

      And yet, we pay a lot less for Microsoft than we did for free open source. Figure that. Maybe Microsoft knows exactly what to charge to make the labor savings you get with their platform worthwhile.

      --
      Peter predicted that you would "deliberately forget" creation 2000 years ago...
    2. Re:Commodity IT workers by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah, it saves the effort, but at the same time it stifles your own growth. Software and processes only get better with newer version of their software and far from optimum you might get if you concentrated on your own needs.

    3. Re:Commodity IT workers by foniksonik · · Score: 1

      If MS can accommodate your needs at base pricing (read off the shelf software) you are coasting. Your business will get out competed by someone using a custom tool chain in the near future.

      --
      A fool throws a stone into a well and a thousand sages can not remove it.
    4. Re:Commodity IT workers by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Sayeth the PRMan as the ship sinks into irrelevance... Likewise, the Anonymous Coward slacks off into the dimly lit periphery.

  19. Why? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Because IT is the new mcjob.

    Every kid has a computer degree now. And you are completely replaceable by one. (or so HR says)

    Smart companies know better... but how many of THOSE are there... lol

  20. Lucky by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Man I wish I made that much. I make $10.71 hr doing It help desk.

    1. Re:Lucky by MrLogic17 · · Score: 1

      You could. Get some skills, maybe a few certifications. Apply for every possible job that looks remotely interesting.

      It's your career- take charge of it. Nobody else will.

    2. Re:Lucky by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      You could. Get some skills, maybe a few certifications. Apply for every possible job that looks remotely interesting.

      It's your career- take charge of it. Nobody else will.

      Nice sentiment, but it's rarely that easy. Take where I live, for example: Southern Indiana. Tech jobs are practically nonexistent, regardless of how much education I have, and the companies around here that have anything to do with tech simply aren't hiring for anything more advanced than tech support monkey, if they're hiring at all. Why is that? It's anyone's guess, but I have a theory:

      The folks who have the (few) jobs above tech-support monkey are firmly entrenched in whatever company they work for, and aren't moving up, down, or sideways. They'll be doing that job with that company until they retire or die, which may or may not be their fault, the companies they work for aren't exactly overflowing with tech-based initiatives anyway. But that means if you start working under them, upward mobility is nonexistent.

      So you take the only tech related job you can find, some low-level help desk gig, and make just enough to scrape by. Or, if you're lucky, enough to live on and be reasonably comfortable (i.e. can pay all your bills on time). And after a time you want to move up in the tech world. Only you can't move up in your current company because your boss and everyone in the chain of command down to you is 20 years from retirement; you can't go to another local company because they have all of their positions filled, permanently (nobody's going anywhere unless they retire, die, or get fired); you can get certifications (at your own expense, natch. the company isn't going to pay for them, especially if they're not directly related to your current job), but without some kind of actual job to put them to use, they're not going to do much good other than personal improvement; or you could move to where the jobs are, which would be great if you could afford to do that, companies these days aren't going to relocate you unless you're exceptional (and most of us, contrary to what we might think, are not), and since you're spending most of the money you make on living expenses and repaying student loans/certification expenses, good luck saving up enough money to both move to a new city and survive for longer than a month while you try to get a job, which is bad enough if you're a single person. Married and/or have kids? Forget about it. You'll have to save up for years before you have enough resources to move, and by that time your skills from your certs and education will have withered if you haven't been using them, and with your low-level support desk job, they probably will have.

      So, what do you do?

    3. Re:Lucky by LDAPMAN · · Score: 1

      Get off your ass and spend every spare moment creating something or learning something! Make a job for yourself or demonstrate your value so that people come looking for you. Yes it is incredibly hard but it's either that or keep going in the same rut your in now.

    4. Re:Lucky by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Right! I must be lazy. That must be why after working, sleeping, and being a responsible adult, I barely have time to do any recreational activities, let alone try to pick up a new skill.

      I think you're missing part of the point.

      Even if I devoted all of my increasingly-scarce free-time to learning something (sleep? weekends? hah! who needs 'em?), and even if I'm great at it I still can't get to where the jobs are. Practically nobody these days going to take a chance on relocating a self-taught programmer/sysadmin/database admin (remember, I work full time and make practically peanuts so I can't afford to go back to school or to pay for certifications), when there's a glut of qualified applicants local to the business. Heck, good luck getting your resume past an HR department with those self-taught qualifications.

      Like I said, unless you're exceptional, or you manage to build something exceptional (with your self-taught skills), nobody's going to beat a path to your door when they can hire some schlub locally without having to pay relocation costs.

    5. Re:Lucky by Sadsfae · · Score: 1

      You could. Get some skills, maybe a few certifications. Apply for every possible job that looks remotely interesting.

      It's your career- take charge of it. Nobody else will.

      Nice sentiment, but it's rarely that easy. Take where I live, for example: Southern Indiana. Tech jobs are practically nonexistent, regardless of how much education I have, and the companies around here that have anything to do with tech simply aren't hiring for anything more advanced than tech support monkey, if they're hiring at all. Why is that? It's anyone's guess, but I have a theory:

      The folks who have the (few) jobs above tech-support monkey are firmly entrenched in whatever company they work for, and aren't moving up, down, or sideways. They'll be doing that job with that company until they retire or die, which may or may not be their fault, the companies they work for aren't exactly overflowing with tech-based initiatives anyway. But that means if you start working under them, upward mobility is nonexistent.

      So you take the only tech related job you can find, some low-level help desk gig, and make just enough to scrape by. Or, if you're lucky, enough to live on and be reasonably comfortable (i.e. can pay all your bills on time). And after a time you want to move up in the tech world. Only you can't move up in your current company because your boss and everyone in the chain of command down to you is 20 years from retirement; you can't go to another local company because they have all of their positions filled, permanently (nobody's going anywhere unless they retire, die, or get fired); you can get certifications (at your own expense, natch. the company isn't going to pay for them, especially if they're not directly related to your current job), but without some kind of actual job to put them to use, they're not going to do much good other than personal improvement; or you could move to where the jobs are, which would be great if you could afford to do that, companies these days aren't going to relocate you unless you're exceptional (and most of us, contrary to what we might think, are not), and since you're spending most of the money you make on living expenses and repaying student loans/certification expenses, good luck saving up enough money to both move to a new city and survive for longer than a month while you try to get a job, which is bad enough if you're a single person. Married and/or have kids? Forget about it. You'll have to save up for years before you have enough resources to move, and by that time your skills from your certs and education will have withered if you haven't been using them, and with your low-level support desk job, they probably will have.

      So, what do you do?

      Work for yourself, leverage the finer points of capitalism and charge less than those jokers. It's easier than you think, if you know helpdesk type stuff start with that and build up. If the opportunity isn't there with some established entity become an established entity.

      --
      Have a squat over at the hobo house.
    6. Re:Lucky by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Again, that's a nice sentiment, but it's rarely that easy. Let's say I have a help desk type job that I love and am good at. So I go into business for myself. Now I have to worry about finding clients, keeping clients, servicing clients, paying operations costs, meeting payroll (my own), withholding taxes, finding and keeping office space (unless I want to work from home), drawing up contracts, determining break-even points, getting insurance, incorporating, etc, etc. And if I am wildly successful (unlikely, as the small businesses that would need my services are either doing without or have outsourced most of their work to a third-party super-helpdesk that covers every machine in the building for a few bucks a month, thanks to economies of scale), I'd have to deal with hiring an employee, training, payroll, insurance, management, etc. etc., and would have even less time doing the work I want to do, and more time trying to manage and grow a business in an already saturated market with very few players. Heck, I worked for a company that was the lowest-cost helpdesk/managed services provider in town, and the company still went out of business due to lack of cash flow. Companies, at least around here, just aren't putting cash into supporting and maintaining their IT infrastructure (which will bite them sooner or later, but that's another rant for another time).

  21. Many reasons by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Much more workers, a financial crisis, and the fact that less of the profits reaches the workforce.

  22. Work for smaller firms by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Some large companies are paying very low contracting rates. I've seen rates as low as $37/hr presented to me for jobs that require 10-15 yrs experience.
    Never take such a low paying rate. You hurt yourself, you hurt the industry. Smaller firms are offering $60-$70/hr contracting rates for the same types of positions and 100-140K for perm salaries. Those jobs are out there, I just secured another one after a 4 year contract and a bit of a break.

    Put a price on yourself. Be excellent.

    1. Re:Work for smaller firms by sapgau · · Score: 1

      +1 Well said

    2. Re:Work for smaller firms by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Self-perception can be a big thing. Two years ago I was making $70/hr consulting - respectable, but nothing special for a software developer. Then a year ago, I asked for $140/hr, and got it. Then got a small project at $150/hr - not a lot of hours, but they seemed quite happy with the rates. So this week I'm asking $225/hr when recruiters call.. and while some run for cover, others seem to think that's a perfectly reasonable rate. The one today said "well, they would definitely consider $200/hr, but we'll try it."

      Sure, I know a few fairly modern/exotic skills - but nothing all that special or ultra-rare. I have gone thru the (somewhat excruciating) process of getting an S-Corp up and functioning, which is critical for looking professional. But the big difference is how I approach marketing my services - as a professional whose services the client needs, rather than as a supplicant who needs a job. (Trust me, this can be a real bitch when you're broke.. been there.. but it's totally worth it.)

      The way I figure it, my mechanic charges $128/hr, and my lawyer $350/hr. As a software consultant, I should fall somewhere in between those.

  23. Role in the economy not so important by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Competition brings prices down. It's not just the salary that's stagnant, the price your company charges it's clients for your work is stagnant too. I personally haven't seen a raise since 2009.

    Project are mainly given to the cheapest company who can deliver, quality rarely plays a role. Company that delivers faster/better quality ends up competing with a similar company delivering just as fast and with same quality, and at that tier, price has been stagnant for quite a while.

  24. Microsoft eats it all ! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Whatever IT budgets departments have, they go to never ending upgrades and M$ license increases.
    Send Thank You note to Redmond.

  25. Competitive economy. by fahrbot-bot · · Score: 3, Insightful

    My company prides itself on being "competitive" - which I take to mean they don't pay any more than they have to. The economy is in the tank, so they pay less (or lower raises) - you know, to be "competitive". After all, where else are employees going to go in this job market?

    --
    It must have been something you assimilated. . . .
    1. Re:Competitive economy. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Reminds me of a dilbert comic. The punch line was something along the lines of "Should I scale my effort at work to a more competitive level?"

    2. Re:Competitive economy. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Even companies that are at the top of their field remain "competitive" for salaries. So even if they have 5 or 6% growth over the rest of their industry, they still only pay at industry levels which for the past several years has been 1 to 3%. Never understood the idea of paying industry rates but expecting better than industry returns.

  26. Capitalism by Hatta · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Because of capitalism. Those who do the real important work never get what they are actually worth, as it would cut into the profits made by executives and investors. The labor market cannot ensure that people get paid what they're worth--by which I mean the value they produce--because there's almost always someone willing to do it for less. We under cut each other fighting for scraps, and those at the top keep the bulk of what we produce. This is how capitalism works.

    --
    Give me Classic Slashdot or give me death!
    1. Re:Capitalism by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Just wondering, why not become an executive and investor... Do you hav 401k? Aren't you therefore an investor? And there is no market for executives? Come on...

    2. Re:Capitalism by alexmin · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Take it from someone born and raised under "developed socialism" - it was the same there too. In fact, the best mass occupation in USSR were taxi driver, waiter, butcher - because they dealt with hard cash. Engineers and programmers were making about 150 rubles per month in 1980s. Pair of jeans cost 200 rubles back then.
      Whoever has modded your comment "insightful" is a cretin.

    3. Re:Capitalism by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So in what way does your answer relate to the parent post? He says capitalism works this way and you go on a rant that in the USSR wages were horrible so that means his comment is moot? Wow. Nice train of thought there. Now if it just hadn't derailed the moment you heard someone criticize capitalism....

    4. Re:Capitalism by Beat+The+Odds · · Score: 1

      Do you mean "Corporatism"?

    5. Re:Capitalism by multiben · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Sure. We should just follow one of the many demonstrably successful socialist models.

    6. Re:Capitalism by StripedCow · · Score: 1

      We're all just at the bottom of a big Ponzi scheme. Watch this:
      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mNxRwaF6iyo

      And read this:
      http://www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/thread893084/pg1

      --
      If Pandora's box is destined to be opened, *I* want to be the one to open it.
    7. Re:Capitalism by DeadCatX2 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Do you hav 401k? Aren't you therefore an investor?

      Nope. My 401(k) will be taxed as ordinary income when I go to withdraw from it. If I was an investor, it would be taxed as a capital gain.

      --
      :(){ :|:& };:
    8. Re:Capitalism by RabidReindeer · · Score: 2

      I have been an investor for a long time. Here's a secret: It takes money to make money. If you start out with $5000 and you double it, you have $10,000. If you start out with $500,000 and double it, you have $1 million.

      Here's another secret. If you're working at MacDonald's, you won't have a whole lot left over to buy shares with at the end of the week compared to the person whose paycheck is $150K/year. And it's not just in raw dollars. The $150K guy doesn't need to buy 10 times as much in the way of daily necessities as the $15K McDonald's guy. So percentage-wise, the bigger the salary, the bigger percentage of income is investible. Oh, and then there's the tax rules that favor investment income over paycheck (ask Mitt Romney).

      And while we're on the topic of investing, don't expect to double your investment every year. Some people will, but some people hit the lottery, too. You're going to be doing exceptionally well if you get 10% per year in appreciation. You can boost the yield, but that requires riskier investments. The ones promising a really high yield are either scamming or doing something that they will shortly get caught and prosecuted for.

      So, in sum, you can feather a nest with investments, but unless you're really good at playing markets as a full-time job, you won't get rich off it unless you have a lot of money to play with. The people working on Wall Street make the really big bucks by making small taps into large sums of money as it flows by from one place to another (0.01% of a hundred million or so isn't chicken feed).

      OK. so how about becoming an executive? Well, much as we like to sneer, executives do have to have certain talents. They need to be "people persons", because that's what executives do, is direct people. Not a good fit for your typical anti-social computer geek.

      People skills are essential, but even more essential if you want to get into the Executive Suite is connections. The C-level jobs and corporate directorates form a mutual back-scratching society. They help each other. Outsiders, not so much. If you went to the right schools, came from the right family and/or have/make the right friends, the way will be greased. If you're just some guy nobody knows, you'd better be bringing something with tangible value to the table.

      I could also enumerate out why we're not all becoming rich by founding our our own business and becoming entrepreneurs, but enough. If it was easy to become wealthy in a capitalist society, we'd all be doing it. As it is, the only really easy way is to pick the right parents. All the other ways require work, persistence, the right kind of talent, and luck.

    9. Re:Capitalism by swillden · · Score: 3, Informative

      Do you hav 401k? Aren't you therefore an investor?

      Nope. My 401(k) will be taxed as ordinary income when I go to withdraw from it. If I was an investor, it would be taxed as a capital gain.

      You're investing either way.

      And, if you prefer, you can choose to invest with after-tax dollars, and then when you take your money it's appreciation would be taxed as a capital gain. That's your choice.

      --
      Note to ACs: I usually delete AC replies without reading them. If you want to talk to me, log in.
    10. Re:Capitalism by DeadCatX2 · · Score: 2

      So if it's okay to tax my investments as ordinary income, then you should be okay with taxing all capital gains as ordinary income. Right?

      Wasn't the whole point behind taxing capital gains at a lower rate to encourage investment? And yet here I am, "investing" what will be taxed as ordinary income. So the lower capital gains tax isn't necessary to encourage investment after all.

      --
      :(){ :|:& };:
    11. Re:Capitalism by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      HAHA blame capitalism, then look at the wages in China compared to the cost of living.
      Average wage in Shenzhen - $600/mo. One bedroom apartment - $400/mo.
      Average wage in San Francisco - $5000/mo. One bedroom apartment - $1850/mo.

    12. Re:Capitalism by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Off-topic: I would suggest looking into a Roth 401k if/when your employer starts offering it.

    13. Re:Capitalism by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If you were an investor, your initial investment WAS ALREADY TAXED. When you cash out, you are only taxed on the difference between the ALREADY TAXED initial investment and the NOT YET TAXED gain or "capital gain".

      Your 401(k) is invested BEFORE TAXES. So you are taxed on WITHDRAWAL. And since you only withdrawal a small amount each year, the TAX IS SMALL.

      Better comparison would be a Roth IRA, since that is post-tax money, but is TAX FREE ON WITHDRAWAL. But you are limited on amounts you can put in.

      Try again.

    14. Re:Capitalism by manu0601 · · Score: 1

      Take it from someone born and raised under "developed socialism"

      It seems you fail to imagine there could be choices outside of soviet socialism and globalized capitalism.

    15. Re:Capitalism by swillden · · Score: 1

      Different incentives are needed for different people. Just as you wouldn't be very motivated to invest if you didn't get to defer the taxes and instead had to pay income tax on the money now, plus capital gains on the appreciation when you cash out, others might not be motivated by deferring income tax on current investments only to have to pay full income tax on it (and appreciation) when they sell -- and even if they would like the 401K-style deal, it probably doesn't make sense to give it to them. It's optimized for people who will be taking the money out eventually. The wealthy can often arrange to avoid ever cashing out their investments (well, you could too, but it's not likely to make sense for you).

      --
      Note to ACs: I usually delete AC replies without reading them. If you want to talk to me, log in.
    16. Re:Capitalism by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      Different incentives are needed for different people

      And unfortunately, massive inflation appears to be the only thing that will get the very rich to invest their massive cash reserves.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    17. Re:Capitalism by Wildclaw · · Score: 1

      Sure. We should just follow one of the many demonstrably successful socialist models.

      You used to after WW2. But the rich didn't like it, and hence leveraged the mishandling of the energy supply crisis in the 70s to change the rules.

      Of course, you could argue that you only accidentally implemented socialist policies. But that was basically what a good minimum wage, high margin taxes, anti unemployment policies and large savings among the middle class (due to war bonds being well distributed government debt) lead to.

      It was basically income redistribution that resulted in the citizens indirectly owning a lot of the production capacity. Socialism the US way, keeping the private market, but ensuring that everyone had a decent stake in the market.

    18. Re:Capitalism by alexmin · · Score: 1

      Yea, there other models like French socialism, etc. That does not work either, does it?

    19. Re:Capitalism by TheGoodNamesWereGone · · Score: 1

      Give me a list then, of all the IT people in North Korea, or Cuba, or (name the communist country) who are rich from their skills.

    20. Re:Capitalism by betterprimate · · Score: 1

      Funny, that's the only model that's ever worked.

    21. Re:Capitalism by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Wow, do you even remember how long socialist Britain was on rations after WWII, vs how quickly the capitalist USA was back on its feet?

    22. Re:Capitalism by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's a Hobson's choice. You're still getting taxed, whether you like it or not.

    23. Re:Capitalism by swillden · · Score: 1

      I wasn't aware that there were large uninvested cash reserves. Do you have a reference?

      --
      Note to ACs: I usually delete AC replies without reading them. If you want to talk to me, log in.
    24. Re:Capitalism by swillden · · Score: 1

      Death and taxes.

      --
      Note to ACs: I usually delete AC replies without reading them. If you want to talk to me, log in.
    25. Re:Capitalism by AK+Marc · · Score: 1

      OK. so how about becoming an executive? Well, much as we like to sneer, executives do have to have certain talents. They need to be "people persons", because that's what executives do, is direct people. Not a good fit for your typical anti-social computer geek.

      It's certainly easier if you are a people person, but I know a number of people that are very definately not people persons who are executives. The only problem is that to get to that place, you need to start as a business owner. I'm not a people person, and I've done very well and very poorly in executive positions. I can tell you before I start which I'll do for any particular position. You don't have to lead people if you just do. Set a goal, then tell others what needs to be done to achieve that goal. Then do all you can to make sure it's reached. The lead by example style still works. It's just not popular because it requires that the leader be able to do some of what they are trying to get done.

      So most execs go to the people-person leadership, where the leader can't do any of the jobs of anyone under them, but still works hard at getting to the goal. That type requires people-skills and is anti-geek. But that doesn't mean the geek can't lead. But the geek must be more selective of the environment in which they lead. I've often found that in groups with a people-manager and no set team-lead, the team-lead is often the least socially-competent person in the group. The one that just gets things done. They are a leader, even if you asked them and they denied it, and they have no title to back it up.

    26. Re:Capitalism by manu0601 · · Score: 1

      Yea, there other models like French socialism, etc. That does not work either, does it?

      It worked until the UE rules made it impossible to sustain.

    27. Re:Capitalism by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Sure. We should just follow one of the many demonstrably successful socialist models.

      Like Singapore?

    28. Re:Capitalism by DragonWriter · · Score: 1

      Different incentives are needed for different people. Just as you wouldn't be very motivated to invest if you didn't get to defer the taxes and instead had to pay income tax on the money now, plus capital gains on the appreciation when you cash out, others might not be motivated by deferring income tax on current investments only to have to pay full income tax on it (and appreciation) when they sell -- and even if they would like the 401K-style deal, it probably doesn't make sense to give it to them.

      Why do we need tax incentives to get people to make investments that return profits, aren't profits the incentive?

      To the extent that the specially-favorable treatment of long-term capital gains is justifiable, its justificable not as an incentive but because some kind of special tax treatment of long-term capital gains makes sense in an income tax system that is based on progressive taxation because otherwise you'd treat the non-repeatable income from the increased value of an asset accrued over a multiyear period as if it were "earned" in the year in which the asset was sold, which doesn't reflect that the income was really "earned" over the whole life of the asset, and if assessed for tax purposes as it was "earned" would have resulted in much lower taxes than taxing it when the asset was sold.

    29. Re:Capitalism by euroq · · Score: 1

      Your points are valid, except for this:

      Those who do the real important work never get what they are actually worth

      That has nothing to do with capitalism, that is circumstantial. Sometimes they get more, sometimes they get less, sometimes they get what they are worth. Capitalism actually abets people who do the real important work to get what they are actually worth.

      --
      Just because the U.S. is a republic does not mean it is not a democracy. Democracy/republic are not mutually exclusive.
  27. Maybe people are wising up. by hamster_nz · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I am surprised that it has take the world so long to realise that IT salaries are overpriced. Because the hardware used to be so rare and expensive the people who used it and looked after it were also rare and expensive.Now that the hardware is cheap as chips, and the labor market is approaching truly global is it a big surprise that salaries are flat?

    If a bad patch breaks my two year old $500 company laptop or a $200 tablet I am not going to pay somebody to fix it. I replace it and move my data over. There was a time when PCs cost thousands, and servers cost tens of thousands. People won't pay people $100/hr to fix a $200 devices.

    I also imagine that it is a heck of a lot cheaper to engage off-shore programmers than using local resources (you can't do that for a truck driver...) - supply and demand in a free market in action.

    1. Re:Maybe people are wising up. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Or maybe you just don't know what you're talking about. I mean, if you want to go pitching perfectly good personal hardware, go ahead. I'm not going to stop you. I'll laugh at you for your total ignorance, but that's my right too. The thing is, you can't do that with a server farm, a large storage system, a network, etc., and you certainly can't do it with things that actually require configuring and management. You know, stuff that has just a little bit more to do with running the world than your little two bit el cheapo personal equipment.

      The alleged free market has nothing to do with this because markets aren't free. The rules of markets are set by society, by governments, and ours has been hijacked by profiteers and looters who somehow think they have a God given right to guaranteed profits and cheap labor. Everybody needs to wake up and start demanding that the economy serve US, and not the other way around.

      I'm not sure what you do for a living and I don't want to know because you've convinced me you have not the brainpower for thoughts beyond Randian talking points.

      For myself, pretty much every day lately I deeply regret anything I and other tech pros have done to bring computing to the masses, because every time I read comments like those I am reminded that the masses are kind of dumb.

    2. Re:Maybe people are wising up. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If a transaction system processes a million dollars an hour, and these transactions are driven by sofware levers that web visitors operate, then there is substantial investment in ensuring the process stays running. Its not a setup and walk away. Building robust, fault tolerant, disaster proof solutions is best done by a team of people that know each other and are part of a shared vision.

    3. Re:Maybe people are wising up. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I also imagine that it is a heck of a lot cheaper to engage off-shore programmers than using local resources

      It's now moderately cheaper, and the kicker is that the talent out of India and China has the same ratio as here in the US - 1 to 2 senior/principal-level developers to 8-10 junior/average developers, with the added benefit that salaries in India and China are rising fast enough that senior/principal-level developers there rotate jobs every 2-3 years.

      I've already seen on-shoring of development due to this.

    4. Re:Maybe people are wising up. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      I am surprised that it has take the world so long to realise that IT salaries are overpriced. Because the hardware used to be so rare and expensive the people who used it and looked after it were also rare and expensive.Now that the hardware is cheap as chips, and the labor market is approaching truly global is it a big surprise that salaries are flat?

      If a bad patch breaks my two year old $500 company laptop or a $200 tablet I am not going to pay somebody to fix it. I replace it and move my data over. There was a time when PCs cost thousands, and servers cost tens of thousands. People won't pay people $100/hr to fix a $200 devices.

      I also imagine that it is a heck of a lot cheaper to engage off-shore programmers than using local resources (you can't do that for a truck driver...) - supply and demand in a free market in action.

      that is spoken as someone who doesn't understand that the $2000 server might be bringing in $100000 of revenue per hour. It is not about salvaging the $2000 server. It is about minimizing the lost revenue. That $2000 server might be the billing server for a major medical company. That $2000 server may even be critical to patient-care in a hospital.

    5. Re:Maybe people are wising up. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Sounds like crimes against the environment.

    6. Re:Maybe people are wising up. by Jawnn · · Score: 1

      I am surprised that it has take the world so long to realise that IT salaries are overpriced. Because the hardware used to be so rare and expensive the people who used it and looked after it were also rare and expensive.Now that the hardware is cheap as chips, and the labor market is approaching truly global is it a big surprise that salaries are flat?

      If a bad patch breaks my two year old $500 company laptop or a $200 tablet I am not going to pay somebody to fix it. I replace it and move my data over. There was a time when PCs cost thousands, and servers cost tens of thousands. People won't pay people $100/hr to fix a $200 devices.

      I also imagine that it is a heck of a lot cheaper to engage off-shore programmers than using local resources (you can't do that for a truck driver...) - supply and demand in a free market in action.

      You have a seriously short-sighted view of what constitutes "IT". That $200 tablet relies almost entirely on things developed, managed and maintained by people you never see. Just because you have the impressive tech savvy to copy your data from such device to another doesn't mean that that's all there is to it. The services and applications you depend on run on servers that cost tens of thousands of dollars, on complex networks that are equally expensive. Those services and applications are written, deployed and managed by people with skill sets the average user (like you) can scarcely comprehend. And while it's true that one can hire impressive talent overseas for a fraction of what that talent would cost if hired locally, there are other costs associated with using off-shore talent. Substantial, sometimes even ruinous, costs.

    7. Re:Maybe people are wising up. by MEC2 · · Score: 1

      Hardware is cheap. Data is priceless. Hence, IT can command high prices to maintain data availability.

    8. Re:Maybe people are wising up. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You still need backend servers for those $200 tablets. The data they access has to be stored somewhere considering cheap tablets only have usually 32gigabytes or so of memory.

  28. Things get cheaper by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Information Technology is more important *because* it's cheaper. If IT salaries kept going up, it would be *less* important.

    When automobiles were new and wonderful, every rich guy had a well-paid mechanic. Competent mechanics are hardly starving today, but I doubt the wage rate is going up precipitously. And IT guys are hardly starving either. In both cases, they reap the penalties of success: the IT and automobiles get better -- easier to use, require less maintenance -- aka, cheaper. Welcome to the future. If this process wasn't an ongoing one for the human race, we'd get up in the morning and hunt for grubs.

  29. Rich Get Richer by Mr_Blank · · Score: 4, Informative

    IT is not being picked on, in particular.
        Only the rich are getting richer.

    Click that link to see
    1) Corporate profit margins just hit an all-time high.
    2) Wages as a percent of the economy are at an all-time low.

    1. Re:Rich Get Richer by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Interesting

      How to tell if someone is trying to trick you: when they use 'wages' as a measurement instead of 'total compensation.'

      I'm not saying the situation is great, but if someone shows you numbers like that, you know they aren't being honest.

    2. Re:Rich Get Richer by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm hundred percent certain that money makes the world go round, when will people stop repeating this tired old canard.

    3. Re:Rich Get Richer by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If you think this is a bad thing you are a communest.

      (roman_mir blocked from posting again by liberal conspirasy)

    4. Re:Rich Get Richer by micahraleigh · · Score: 0

      The rich get richer in the Obama administration faster than the Bush administration because the money is going to government-class PhD's in the beltway.

    5. Re:Rich Get Richer by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That one is easy to justify.

      If 2 companies compete, one of them looses (bankruptcy) and the other one takes its customers, which means the CEO is making more money and he can take his knowledge with him to found another company. He can negotiate better salaries beforehand, and when things go well, they make more money and if they can't secure more pay, they simply do nothing.

      If 2 engineers compete, one engineer can't possibly do both jobs at the same time. Maybe one engineer really can do both, but what has he done really? He has learned a new simpler way to do at least one of the two jobs, maybe both. Since people copy and paste the way they work all the time, it means:

      1. The engineer who invents a new better method of work quickly makes himself irrelevant, because he is no longer necessary. His manager knows this. His manager want a bigger piece of the pie, which means "if I save the company 100,000 a year, I deserve at least 30,000". Firing an engineer is a sure way to save some money and guess who you can fire now that the new method is working?

      2. The CEO usually acts as if he knew, giving as little information to coworkers as possible. He demands all his direct reports to do the same while at the same time, give all information to him (he can fire them, he can avoid them from getting another job in the same industry, that's the whole point of getting recommendations), meaning:

      2.1 They all act as if they knew even if they don't.

      2.2 They all hide information from the lower ranked employees and keep threatening them.

      So real innovation comes from the bottom (saving money), but the guys at the top take all the credit (and the profits).

      Any questions?

    6. Re:Rich Get Richer by shentino · · Score: 1

      Basic theory is that high profit attracts competition.

      Competition lowers prices and thus profits.

      So...why are profits still obscenely high?

      I dunno, but sounds like the attracted competition isn't getting in the market to lower profits back down again.

      I smell an anti-trust rat.

  30. Guess who gets all the benefits? by mspohr · · Score: 4, Insightful

    This is common across all sectors and all skill levels.
    The corporations have set things up so that the owners and managers capture all of the profit and any productivity gains. They have also bought enough politicians to keep their tax rates low so they don't have to contribute to the "general welfare". Corporate profits and upper management incomes are at record levels.
    The situation with tech wages is the same as that with WalMart employees. You are expendable and replaceable and if you make trouble you will be fired so just sit down and shut up and get to work. At least tech wages are above poverty level so they don't have to go on Medicaid and food stamps to survive... be thankful for small favors.
    The last time things were this far out of kilter was the 1930s and that gave rise to the union movement (as well as socialists and communists). This time, people seem more complacent and are just happy to have small crumbs.

    --
    I don't read your sig. Why are you reading mine?
    1. Re:Guess who gets all the benefits? by cyber-vandal · · Score: 3, Funny

      Because unions are evil and socialism is the same as satanism.

    2. Re:Guess who gets all the benefits? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Tax rates are not low. Corporate tax is generally 35%. Subtracting 15% capital gains rate from the remainder of that, the effective rate is 58%.

      From statistics at the Bureau of Economic Analysis, corporate profits are currently at $2T anually, after tax 1.4T, which is 30% in taxes. The effective tax rate is therefore a little lower at 51%.

      To prevent the collapse of the dollar, a large majority of profits will have to be confiscated and then we end up as the new USSR. Alternatively, we could cut a large amount of spending, but that will never happen without a collapse.

    3. Re:Guess who gets all the benefits? by sjames · · Score: 1

      I say we sacrifice some owners and managers to the Dark Lord in exchange for higher wages!

    4. Re:Guess who gets all the benefits? by Wildclaw · · Score: 1

      Tax rates are not low. Corporate tax is generally 35%. Subtracting 15% capital gains rate from the remainder of that, the effective rate is 58%.

      58? 1-0.65*0.85=0.4475

      And that is a really low rate for taxing rent seeking as you want 70-90% taxes on that to prevent money from earning money.

    5. Re:Guess who gets all the benefits? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      the current crop of socialists

      Wow, did you grow up in Alabama or something? Your application of the word socialist is so far removed from reality you could hardly use it less correctly if you tried.

      That said, not only are you butchering the dictionary, you are also ignoring the reality of economics. You try to make a case for lowering the tax rate on the wealthiest while ignoring one very important fact. In the 1950's, the distribution of wealth in the US was far more even. Now, the lion's share of the wealth in this country is concentrated in the hands of very few. Raising the income tax on income above $250k is the only way to actually see an equitable amount of money coming in to the federal government with regards to the share of the economy that is represented. Lowering the tax rates on the top only further accelerates the differential income - and wealth - distribution in this country. And as that differential becomes greater, the people who have the least become effectively poorer, not wealthier.

      Or are you trying to ensure that the poor never have a chance to get ahead? Do you really hate the middle class so much that you want to make sure the only direction you can go from there is down?

    6. Re:Guess who gets all the benefits? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Or are you trying to ensure that the poor never have a chance to get ahead? Do you really hate the middle class so much that you want to make sure the only direction you can go from there is down?

      Spot on. This is one thing the supply-siders don't seem to get - if you expect people to succeed by "pulling themselves up by their bootstraps," there has to be opportunity for them.

      You can't start a successful business and get rich if you have no customers because they, like you, are in the increasingly-strapped middle class and have no extra cash to spend on what you're selling.

    7. Re:Guess who gets all the benefits? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's not entirely untrue. If you look at past implementations, socialism is probably THE worst possible form of government. It ensures the butt kissers get a ride to the top while the unwashed masses suffer in poverty. For the everyday joe there's no reason to work hard or think outside the box because even if you have a good idea it will be taken for the good of the people and you'll be a good comrade who's still part of the unwashed masses living in poverty. I challenge you to look at every society in which it's been tried. Now unions, at one time, represented the needs of employees agains abhorrant working conditions. Now days they're pretty good at siphoning off income from your paycheck, and negotiating away your benefits. The union bosses do rather well. They drive nice cars, live in fancy houses, play golf (in other words look a whole lot like a CEO), but the people they represent? Now instead of having the company leaching off them they have the union too.

    8. Re:Guess who gets all the benefits? by shentino · · Score: 1

      Such high profits ought to attract competition on the supply side of the market.

      Shouldn't it?

      So where is it?

  31. you're working on the wrong hardware by Chirs · · Score: 3, Insightful

    NEBS-compliant enterprise- or telco-grade systems still cost tens of thousands of dollars and people definitely pay people good money to work on them.

    The company I work for is on-shoring work after figuring out that off-shoring it dropped the quality substantially.

    1. Re:you're working on the wrong hardware by hamster_nz · · Score: 1

      I agree - but the amount of high-end hardware (and the need for it) is not expanding at the same rate as the pool of IT workers...

      Long gone are the days when a departmental server would cost more than the average salary.

      In the late 1990s I installed a large data warehouse for the ministry responsible for social security. It was $2M list - 4 CPUs, 12GB RAM, 2TB disk, and was used by a team of data analysts. I now have that hardware on my desktop (but without the IOPs of 2TB of 72GB spindles of course!).

    2. Re:you're working on the wrong hardware by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The company you work for cares enough about quality that it will measure it?

      Amazing!

    3. Re:you're working on the wrong hardware by sjames · · Score: 1

      According to the CxOs out there we need more H1Bs because the pool of IT workers is shrinking compared to the need.

    4. Re:you're working on the wrong hardware by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's funny. For as often as I hear this sentiment I am amazed at how many companies still simply look at "oh, gee all the money I could save" and never wonder why it is that most companies that have tried off-shoring realized their mistake and brought the work back home. It's like they all live in thier own little bubble oblivious to the rest of the world.

    5. Re:you're working on the wrong hardware by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Offshoring is tapering off because these educated IT workers in China/India are no longer as cheap as they were 20 years ago. They're still cheaper, but when you factor in the other costs of off-shoring such as quality issues, time zone differences (it might take 1-2 days to do something that would normally take 1-2 hours domestically because "they" are asleep while you're awake and sending them emails), and overhead (overhead being having to manage the workers, pay for your legal entity in that country, deal with foreign legal issues, and etc.) it becomes less attractive to send work there.

      Telco in general is doing pretty shitty though. I'm sure you're aware of what happened to Nortel. Every other major player in that space is either flat, declining, or holding on for dear life. NSN is probably going to be the next Nortel, possibly followed by ALU. I used to work at Nortel back in the "dot-bomb" days prior to the big contraction in telecom in the early 2000's (when I got let go in a round of layoffs). I wouldn't advise anyone to work in telecom right now unless it's in one of the niche areas of telecom that is doing really well - in which case you're probably working on pure software rather than touching a Netra box.

  32. Re:Do you guys really make that much? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If you'd clean monkey cages for $40 an hour, why aren't you working as a plumber for $120 an hour?

  33. Marginal utility by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marginal_utility

  34. No unions. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It's a free market, kiddos. You want higher wages... form a union and then sit back and wait while your job is offshored to non-unionized third world types. LOL. Suckers.

    1. Re:No unions. by shentino · · Score: 1

      Free market means free on BOTH sides of the market.

      Hint: If high profits ostensibly predicted to attract competition from other firms fails to do so, then something fishy is going on.

  35. Re:Do you guys really make that much? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Writing code is the easy part, and worth $10/hr.

    Repeatedly delivering,maintaining, and improving functioning, productive applications/tools/utilities to users and customers is the hard part, and worth the extra $30 or more.

    ie the business of tech is a lot more difficult than script kiddie weekend foo in your jammies.

  36. If IT is so important... by MrLogic17 · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Important != Valuable

    The cleaning crew is important. Long haul truckers are important. Neither are high paying jobs.

    Every occupation thinks theirs is the most important, and deserving of higher pay. IT is no different.

    1. Re:If IT is so important... by betterunixthanunix · · Score: 3, Insightful

      It could be that all those occupations are deserving of higher pay. Companies would not last long without competent workers, just like they would not last long without competent management, but the pay difference is not even close to being in proportion. Profit would be impossible if nobody was taking the time to determine what products a company makes, what services it provides, or what markets it operates in; profit would be equally impossible if nobody were taking the time to make products, provide customers with service, or actually work in those target markets.

      The Morlocks need the Elois; the Elois need the Morlocks.

      --
      Palm trees and 8
    2. Re:If IT is so important... by SeaFox · · Score: 1

      It could be that all those occupations are deserving of higher pay. Companies would not last long without competent workers, just like they would not last long without competent management, but the pay difference is not even close to being in proportion. Profit would be impossible if nobody was taking the time to determine what products a company makes, what services it provides, or what markets it operates in; profit would be equally impossible if nobody were taking the time to make products, provide customers with service, or actually work in those target markets..

      It's because of marketers. They're go good at selling themselves they've convinced companies that they're the only employees worth anything because they bring in revenue directly, and everyone else is just a liability or other "cost of doing business", so those roles should be taken care of for as little cost as possible and the people fulfilling them are easily replaceable cogs. They also then in turn get themselves promoted into higher management positions at the company and soon the company is being run by the marketers (Ballmer being a prime example).

      This, as you point out, ignores that the marketers would have no doohickeys to sell without the people in the "lower positions" making them. And most consumers would not buy complicated doohickeys from a company that did not offer support staffed by competent people.
      I disagree with the inverse, though. Companies have been making products and selling them and growing as a business for centuries without dedicated marketing departments bombarding people with advertising. A well made product that fulfills a need for an audience, made by a company that stands behind it will be successful and allow a business to grow without positive promotional pressure.

    3. Re:If IT is so important... by foniksonik · · Score: 1

      Long haul truckers start at 80k and go up to 120k. Not a great example.

      --
      A fool throws a stone into a well and a thousand sages can not remove it.
    4. Re:If IT is so important... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      >It could be that all those occupations are deserving of higher pay

      Yeah, we'll raise the rates for all occupations so that everybody gets above average pay. That'll work. *rolls eyes*

    5. Re:If IT is so important... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Actually, the Elois can do just fine with making Morlocks automating everything and then kill off the Morlocks.
      At least for a short enough while to be worthwhile to the few..

      Captcha: slowdown

    6. Re:If IT is so important... by burning-toast · · Score: 2

      And depending on employer: Frequently have to purchase their own rigs (~cost of a mortgage), frequently pay for their own fuel out of that "pay", spend ridiculous amounts of time away from family (or cannot really have one), and I dare say don't have ready access to health care amongst other things, and only typically make figures like that by barely skirting around maximum "safe" hours driving laws and picking up extra loads (sometimes against employer contracts) to deliver along the way...

      So still a viable example I think...

      - Toast

    7. Re:If IT is so important... by MEC2 · · Score: 1

      Work will still get done if the toilet seat is dirty. If the server is down, however...

    8. Re:If IT is so important... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Except that our Elois found a way to not be touched by the Morlocks...

    9. Re:If IT is so important... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I was wondering where I had seen another Morlock/Eloi analogy. Then I looked around. It was you.

      The Time Machine is just a book, not an actual history of the future.

  37. More Qualifications, Same Pay by Revotron · · Score: 1

    This study focuses on "tech" positions (a very broad description) that require a Bachelor's degree. Here's what I'm left wondering after reading this:

    Are they adjusting for the fact that a low-skilled tech position (tech support) in 2000 paying $12/hr did not require a Bachelor's, but in the current workforce climate, the same low-skilled tech support job at the same pay rate commonly requires that applicants have "at least" an Associates, but preferably (read: we won't hire you if you don't have) a Bachelor's degree? If this was not adjusted for, then the reason they're seeing diluted wages vs. what they expected is because with that one little change in the requirements for a position, a lot more jobs fit their description now than did jobs in 2000, which adds a lot of low wages to their data set and reduces the overall average wage across the entire IT field.

  38. Important expensive by coldsalmon · · Score: 1

    A lot of other people can do the same job, and they will accept a low wage. Food is even more important than tech, but farm laborers make much less than tech workers.

  39. Err supplyband demand silly by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    That's it - the economy doesn't figure out who 'deserves' the most pay, it's supply and demand ... only.

    1. Re:Err supplyband demand silly by crioca · · Score: 2

      That's it - the economy doesn't figure out who 'deserves' the most pay, it's supply and demand ... only.

      Spoken like a true Libertarian: A sweeping statement with little attention given to reality.

      There's a hell of a lot more that factors into pay rates for industries - even at a macro level - than just supply and demand. Industry trends, transfer pricing, changes in goods costs within in an industry, the difference between internal and external facing roles. There's a myriad of factors that go into the equation.

    2. Re:Err supplyband demand silly by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I think all the other factors you just listed can be boiled down, again, to supply and demand. What's an industry trend if not a change in demand? Why is there a difference between internal and external facing roles? Does it have anything to do with the relative supply of people cut out for external roles vs internal ones? Also, you mis-capitalized libertarian and confused it with the word economist.

    3. Re:Err supplyband demand silly by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "a myriad of factors", sounds like a sweeping statement with little attention given to reality too.

      Your bigotry won't win you any favor around here.

  40. outsourcing does it's thang by cod3r_ · · Score: 2

    Use to be a hot topic, but now it's just an accepted practice. Wages are down because no one in the US wants to actually employee anyone. Stems from much larger problems with our country as a whole IMO.

  41. Re:Do you guys really make that much? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    There is a difference between "writing code" and software engineering. If you want half ass hackish code, you can pay someone $10 an hour to do it. I did that before college for several small businesses. However, the skills have I have now dwarf what I could do then. I'm worth what I make. Also remember that medium include for the US includes the middle of no where like alabama as well as silicon valley, new york and other high cost of living areas. For someone in michigan to move to california, they'd have to almost double the salary to break even. When you see numbers, you have to consider WHERE too.

    I've had to change employers to get raises the last few years. I'd rather stay somewhere a long time, but they make it so difficult.

  42. Re:Do you guys really make that much? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Writing code is easy and frankly kind of fun.

    Writing code in an enterprise environment is usually difficult and frankly kind of a pain.

  43. Improving over the Dot Com Boom is bad? by erice · · Score: 1

    2000 was the top of the Dot Com boom, a gold rush period for computer professions that we may never see again. If average wages have improved in real terms at all from that starting point, it is actually kind of impressive.

  44. One "word": H-1Bs by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Throw 65,000 workers who are willing to work at sub-par wages without bitching or complaining into any narrow industry segment and wages across the board will go into the toilet. This happened with the textile industry and the meat packing industry. It is happening with IT.

    Had Congress not just allowed companies to say, "wah, we can't get a CISSP for $25,000 a year, we need a gastarbeiter", the IT industry in the US would be a lot healthier... mainly because in any industry you get what you pay for. You want someone who will work cheap? You get that type of work out. You want someone who has been in the industry 20 years? You might get someone who actually knows the difference between FCoE and iSCSI.

    Had Congress actually told companies to perhaps see about helping with education so there are more people hitting CS/MIT as majors (as opposed to now where high school counselors tell kids to avoid the STEM industry in general due to offshoring and hiring low-wage foreign workers), the US mighty actually still have an economy.

  45. Supply and Demand by matthaak · · Score: 2

    What was the supply and demand for IT labor like 10 years ago? What is it like now? Therein lies the answer.

    1. Re:Supply and Demand by im_thatoneguy · · Score: 1

      According the summary unemployment has doubled. I think that's the best supply/demand metric. 4% unemployment is GREAT! But it would also imply that the supply/demand ratio has gone up. So rising wages while demand dropping and supply increasing during a recession? That's a crowning achievement!

  46. Extremely lucky they're ONLY flat by petes_PoV · · Score: 1
    IT is basically just a commodity skill these days. You buy in as much (measured in heads) as you need. You expect to be able to shop around, globally, for the cheapest cost per head.

    There's no longer any need (well: almost no need) for a code-writer to be present in any particular geographical area, so long as where they are has reliable internet, stable government and degree level education. After that, it's simply a case of who is willing to do the job for the least amount of money.

    The wonder is why there are still SO MANY programming jobs in costly, western countries - not that they pay so little.

    --
    politicians are like babies' nappies: they should both be changed regularly and for the same reasons
    1. Re:Extremely lucky they're ONLY flat by sandysnowbeard · · Score: 2

      People say this about programmers being able to work wherever, but when you're developing something on a wide variety of devices (like trying to write Android software that works on Vanilla Google Nexus, Samsung, LG, Motorola, HTC, etc. devices), it's reasonable for a localized team of people to share those devices, but not so practical if people are distributed. This becomes even more of an issue with secret or not-yet-released devices, which come with HUGE liabilities if you lose or misplace them.

      Furthermore, working as a team is _way_ more efficient if you can walk a few paces over and talk to people. I mean, this is the kind of thing that slows down business if people aren't even on the same floor, let alone in different buildings or different cities or land masses. And doing video chats or phone chats is never going to be as good as _being there_.

      Lastly, it's hard to get a GOOD, salaried remote code-writing job if you've not worked for a given company in its local area first.

    2. Re:Extremely lucky they're ONLY flat by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      >The wonder is why there are still SO MANY programming jobs in costly, western countries - not that they pay so little.

      I don't wonder that at all, my perspective being one of those costly western developers who have to work together with cheap asian programmers of sister-companies. You see, if you hire the cheapest developers willing to do the job, you don't actually get people who are ABLE to do the job.

      No, I'm not worried. If asian managers ever realize that hiring the cheapest and then treating them as cattle is a bad idea, maybe then I'll look up from my desk with a slightly worried frown. Or I would if I weren't too old to care. Lay me off tomorrow and I'll be one happy indie game developer :-p

    3. Re:Extremely lucky they're ONLY flat by petes_PoV · · Score: 1

      Yes, there's merit in what you say. Just like restaurants tend to cluster together (the best place to open a restaurant is next to another restaurant) so it is with en-masse IT. However, that doesn't argue for having that IT development in a high cost country, when there are hundreds of excellently trained IT staff in the very same city that hosts the hardware production, too. Hint: that isn't where I live - probably not where you live, either. Long ago all the manu's worked out it was 4x cheaper to make stuff overseas than here. Software's heading the same way for the same reasons.

      --
      politicians are like babies' nappies: they should both be changed regularly and for the same reasons
    4. Re:Extremely lucky they're ONLY flat by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      WIre the device via JTAG and shit to a dev server in HQ, and SSH in?

  47. Supply and Demand by machinelou · · Score: 1

    If the unemployment rate is above historical rates for Tech jobs, that would suggest there are more workers than jobs to fill. Even if demand for tech workers is high (you suggest it's high by calling it 'so important'), wages should be flat if the supply of workers is meeting that demand. It also makes sense given the availability of substitutes (i.e., out sourcing).

  48. Price Fixing by genfail · · Score: 3, Insightful

    ..because the rich man has been engaging in price fixing for wages for the last thirty years across all areas of the economy except executive compensation.

    1. Re:Price Fixing by AK+Marc · · Score: 1

      They've been price fixing executive pay as well. One exec votes on another exec's pay, knowing the second exec is voting on his pay next week. A simple SEC regulation of "nobody may serve on a board if they have any compensation set by that or any other board" would work, for two days, until they make a similar back-room deal for setting compensation in a mutually beneficial manner that wasn't designed to help the companies involved.

      Otherwise, it would take a successful lawsuit against the board of directors of a company, which isn't going to happen, even with proof of malfeasance (and they never leave proof).

  49. We're complaining about making .com wages? by Burning1 · · Score: 2

    Seriously guys, are we complaining that wages are back up to .com levels? Am I the only one who remembers that as a few years of obscenely wasteful spending? Hell, I was a 16 year old making $40K a year back then.

    Could you imagine a banker complaining that they aren't back up to 2006 level salaries?

    1. Re:We're complaining about making .com wages? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Could you imagine a banker complaining that they aren't back up to 2006 level salaries?

      When did bankers' compensation drop? Do you think troubles in financial markets ever mean the people running these markets take a hit?

    2. Re:We're complaining about making .com wages? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Could you imagine a banker complaining that they aren't back up to 2006 level salaries?

      Yes.

    3. Re:We're complaining about making .com wages? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Of course not, you think they want to go down to 2006 levels? http://economix.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/10/11/bankers-salaries-vs-everyone-else

  50. Re:Do you guys really make that much? by Tacticus.v1 · · Score: 1

    Plumbers and sparkies require licensing because when you don't you have live pipes and only a single colour of wiring for active, neutral and ground.

  51. How to Lie with Statistics by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This article could just as well have been titled "Tech Wages Now Higher than at Peak of Dot-Com Bubble". Choose two points on a wildly fluctuating curve, find the slope and make whatever conclusion you want.

  52. Re:Do you guys really make that much? by spinozaq · · Score: 1

    If you are capable of software development, why the hell are you working a job with manual labor for $10 an hour? There are lots of software development jobs open out there. Go beat the pavement. Walk right in the front door with your resume dressed up. Make it happen. I'm not sure if this article is about "IT" or "Development", the media tends to confuse those things. However, if you are capable programmer, go make a living out of it.

    Now, you might have a bit of learning curve to go from "coding" to getting the skills to be a good developer. However, you can find a place that will pay you less to start since you have no real world experience. Learn fast, and move up. It's not going to happen unless you try!

    Just as an aside, "Plumber" hourly wages are a little different then an employee's hourly wage. It's like a car mechanic garage's "hourly rate". It's a business rate, out of that comes expenses before anyone gets paid. That said, they make a good living.

  53. why is it you think that its so damn important? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    you people like to think of idiotic repetitive tasks like configuring mysql clusters as
    somehow more challenging and socially important than writing novels, or butchering pigs, or cabinet
    manufacture, or teaching...maybe its just not

  54. A lot of numbers mean nothing by houghi · · Score: 1

    If you do not compare it to other things, numbers mean nothing.
    Please give numbers for other professions.

    And the wages INCREASED almost 2USD. As the increase already included adjustment for inflation, this is an increase of almost 19%.
    So you keep using that word flat, but I don't think it means what you think it means.

    Again: adjusted for inflation.

    --
    Don't fight for your country, if your country does not fight for you.
    1. Re:A lot of numbers mean nothing by colinrichardday · · Score: 1

      How is two 19% of 37.27? It's less than 6% of 37.27. Nineteen percent of 37.27 is slightly over 7.

  55. Level of Incompetence by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    In a Hierarchy Every Employee Tends to Rise to His Level of Incompetence.

  56. It's extremelly hard to value an IT worker by obarthelemy · · Score: 1

    Some professions are somewhat easy to assess:
    you can test pupils before/after, and know if a teacher is good or not (not that teachers like that, mind you ^^)
    you can value sales rep (that's me) by... sales, or margins, or new accounts

    Devs for example are much harder to evaluate. You obviously can't rate by quantity of code. Quality is a pain to evaluate (takes time, is too "soft" to have a firm yardstick, is often voluntarily compromised to get products quicker...). Goal-oriented evaluation is warped: "implementing such and such backend" can mean beautiful code that will scale, is well documented, and easy to maintain, or spaghetti crap that'll break in 6 months.

    Plus there are lots of cross-dependencies. A good Java programmer may suck at database stuff, while a very good Java+DB coder may not be very good as a general purpose dev.

    If you can't evaluate, you can't value.

    --
    The Cloud - because you don't care if your apps and data are up in the air.
    1. Re:It's extremelly hard to value an IT worker by sapgau · · Score: 1

      +1 Interesting

  57. We are all morons... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    When you go to work for one of these narcissistic pinhead tyrant CEOs it is your job to make them, their company, and their shareholders rich, NOT you. This is why I believe those bastards should be taxed as high as conceivably possible. When you slave away your talents, year after year, helping to make others rich, you should be able to share in that wealth.

    Consider a person who makes 10 million a year. Most normal people dream of making 1 million over-their-entire-lifetime, and even then they won't end up with that in the bank. So the normal person ends up buying things on credit, having mortgages, having to may extra over long periods of time to get things. The rich? No, they can pretty much pay for things all-at-once. Why pay interest on your $60,000 car, or on your $2,000,000 dollar home? Just flat out buy it, and own it right then. A person making 10 million a year is really making 10 lifetimes worth of money than a normal person... IN-ONE-YEAR, and they rarely pay a thin dime in interest towards anything. And with all that money, they don't even need to work anymore. They can quit real-work any time they want... lazy ass slackers. Not to mention the peace-of-mind that comes with being rich. Why are we protecting these people?

    The rich hoard large amounts of our economic money pile themselves, so the government ends up "printing more money" to keep money flowing in the system. That's another bail-out right there. The whole scheme seems geared upon moving more and more money into the hands of the already well off, and protecting those people at the same time. It's nuts. Wan'na make a new iPad like device? Forget it, you can't compete. Want to grow organic crops? Forget it, Monsanto holds all the patents.

    And while we're at it, why is social security an 'entitlement'? ITS MY MONEY! I WANT IT BACK.

    Stop working for companies. Just give up. You can't win.

  58. Hate to say this but: It's because of self-esteem by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    We geeks generally have a rather low self-esteem. We put women on pedestals. We think we are bad at socializing. We notoriously don't unionize. We let others walk all over ourselves.

    So it's no surprise we, despite being highly skilled, and having no trouble getting well-paid jobs everywhere just by mentioning we’re available, let companies treat us that way.

    And don't hate me because I said what everyone was thinking, but nobody wanted to admit to himself. It took me long to realize this too. You know it's true.

  59. Resetting Passwords by gooner666 · · Score: 1

    Doesnt take much to tell someone to turn off their caps lock key or to reset their password because of the overly draconian password policies some companies have.

    --
    Lets get this over with... Fuck Off
  60. PHBs and credit by Kwyj1b0 · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Two (related) reasons that I have heard as to why IT isn't valued as much as it should be (I myself am not in the IT field, so this is more like hearsay):

    Clueless PHB: This is partly the fault of those who work in IT not educating those higher up in the food chain. PHBs don't look on IT as producers, but as cost centers. So they try to skimp on hiring competent people. And the IT people don't have direct relations with the clients (in most firms), so when it comes time to decide bonuses or raises, IT is generally at the back of the line. While IT is what allows everyone else to raise money, the PHBs would rather look at a $60k fresher vs. a $120k experienced admin and ask why they shouldn't just outsource it for $45k. They don't see the downside in having a poor IT team even after it bites them (just fire one newbie and hire another in his place).
    One admin I know used this solution (based on "You and Your Research" by Richard Hamming) after most of his team were outsourced (not because the team was bad, but because the PHB saw cost savings): everytime the outsourcing created a problem and someone tried to scream at him (he was their internal liaison to the external contractor) he told them to go tell PHB "we lost/cost $X extra because the contractor screwed up." Only when the PHB saw how much the "real" cost of outsourcing IT was, did he reverse the policy.

    Taking Credit: As an old saying goes - the competent IT admin fixes problems before they happen. And then the PHB wonders why he is paying $X for new servers and infrastructure when the current system works fine. IT people should be more proactive about boasting about what they do. Sure, this is distasteful to lots of technical people. But guess what? Everyone else brags and lets their manager know (in a not so subtle way) of why they deserve more money: "I sold $YYY to MY clients". So the IT team needs to take credit for sales they help with. If an employee used a lot of resources to construct a portfolio for a client, it isn't all to the trader's credit. YOUR software and hardware helped him run simulations and generate the portfolio. So add THAT to your pitch. If one of the IT workers stayed up half the night so a client could get some figures/data - he should get credit instead of letting the suit tell the story. A knight wouldn't have killed the dragon unless he had a magic sword - but the armorer doesn't get any songs written about him.

    The flipside is to be realistic about what you are doing - this isn't the dot-com boom. Don't expect riches for trivial work. If you do good/tough work, expect to be compensated as well (and let your bosses know why YOU are better than everyone out there). But if you just make a CSS/HTML page, don't try to claim you are God's gift to the firm.

    1. Re:PHBs and credit by Javaman59 · · Score: 1

      ...

      Taking Credit: As an old saying goes - the competent IT admin fixes problems before they happen. And then the PHB wonders why he is paying $X for new servers and infrastructure when the current system works fine. IT people should be more proactive about boasting about what they do. Sure, this is distasteful to lots of technical people. But guess what? Everyone else brags and lets their manager know (in a not so subtle way) of why they deserve more money: "I sold $YYY to MY clients". So the IT team needs to take credit for sales they help with. If an employee used a lot of resources to construct a portfolio for a client, it isn't all to the trader's credit. YOUR software and hardware helped him run simulations and generate the portfolio. So add THAT to your pitch. If one of the IT workers stayed up half the night so a client could get some figures/data - he should get credit instead of letting the suit tell the story. A knight wouldn't have killed the dragon unless he had a magic sword - but the armorer doesn't get any songs written about him.

      ...

      If I could change one thing in my personal management, over 30 years in the business, it would be to advertise and promote myself, rather than to passively expect my achievements to be noticed. The passive approach usually worked when I was working with a team of other programmers, but it was spectacularly unsuccessful when I was the only programmer, or chief programmer, in a non-software business. The passive approach was also much more successful in my younger years, than in my fourties. People outside software expect programming to be easy, and, moreover, if the delivered product is good, and produced without visible project stress, they only see that as confirmation of the fact that it was easy. If there are visible problems, which happens on 99% of projects, then they see that as evidence of the incomptance of their programmers, and think that solution is to let the current team go (by no responding to wage requests) and get a better team, at the same price.

      I think that "under promise, and over deliver" has to be part of the solution, in sharp contrast to the usual gung-ho, iron-man approach of programmers to estimating and promising.

      An anecdote of how non-programmers view software is a discussion I had with my mother about web development. I mentioned to her that it is usually more difficult to build a complex site, than it is to build a pretty interface, and I mentioned google an example of a complex site. Her blank expression prompted me to suggest "You don't think that google is complex, do you?", and she just said, "Well, not really". Obviously, to her, a simple text box which searches the web is not complex! :)

      --
      I'm a software visionary. I don't code.
    2. Re:PHBs and credit by Zeromous · · Score: 1

      I agree with this comment 100%. This is how I keep my head above water and distinguish myself from the pack.

      --
      ---Up Up Down Down Left Right Left Right B A START
  61. Lots of reasons by ErichTheRed · · Score: 4, Interesting

    One very important point that you may have missed is this -- tech IS very important. Even organizations who don't care about IT beyond basic file and print have a stake in making sure things they use work well. But, IT is one of those fields where you can still cover over massive, huge, big balls of fail with money to the right vendor or cheap labor. Because of this, companies don't like to pay for competent help, or if they do, they squeeze every last nickel out of it that they can because they feel it's a waste.

    Also, "tech" is too broad. The desktop support guy changing toner cartridges, the help desk person changing passwords and the systems architect trying to make sure everything doesn't come crashing to a halt when you put it in the same room have very different jobs, skills and responsibilities. On the simple break-fix support/part-swapper side, the work is getting easier and more automated. This means that you can hire fewer people, and those that you do hire don't need to have as much specialist knowledge. I'm a systems engineer, dealing with Intel server boxes every day -- the vendors have resorted to putting an extra "Don't pull this drive out!" light on hard disks so that part swappers don't pull a second drive out of a failed disk array and cause data loss. Even though the failed drive has a big blinky red light on it. That tells me that customers have complained about this happening enough...so you can draw your own conclusions about skill sets. On the higher end, you just run into wage pressure, companies trying to get away with as little as they can.

    I think part of the reason for flat wages across the board is just the overall impression that "computers are simple" now, so why do we need to pay these geniuses to run them? Anyone in corporate IT is keenly aware of the "consumerization" trend, where everyone expects all systems to be as seamlessly integrated as their iPad, no matter how complex.

    So at least in "big corporate IT," there are a few things putting wage pressure on:

    • Automation - just like all the other office jobs, anything that isn't absolutely essential is being turned into an automatic process.
    • Ready supply of cheaper labor - ...and the lack of understanding that cheap labor may not always be the best way to spend money, especially if you have to pay a consultant 5x that amount later on to clean up the mess.
    • Lack of standards and understanding - IT is still seen as a magic box, and any attempts at standardizing things (_cough_ITIL_cough_) have just made things worse and completely pigeonholed a lot of IT employees.
    • Vast difference in skill sets - It is still very difficult to tell whether or not the person you hire is a complete dud based on the interview. I think that a lot of organizations pay less simply because they don't know whether they're actually getting competent help.
    • CapEx vs OpEx - In the old model, you kept employees on staff for a long time, trained them and they learned the business inside and out. Now, accounting makes it cheaper to just hire the people you need, when you need them, and pay them out of the operating expense budget.

    Things like this make IT a very difficult field to work in. I'm not stupid enough to call myself a rock star IT god, but I certainly feel I'm competent and do a good job. Fortunately, I have an employer who appreciates that (for now) and I do OK. The other class of people who are making serious coin in the IT "racket" are the nomadic consultants. How many places have you worked where these guys seem to parachute in out of the sky when a very narrow specialist problem needs to be solved, charge hundreds an hour for months, and are off to the next place requiring that same specialty just as quick as they came in? I know a lot of these guys personally (can't do the lifestyle if you're married or have any sort of ties to any one place or thing) and they're definitely not hurting. For those of us tied down by one thing

    1. Re:Lots of reasons by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "nomadic IT consultants" exist due to existing conditions. If they were compensated according to value, then they wouldn't exist. If they didn't have value, they wouldn't keep getting hired.

  62. Tech is generic - What about [insert buzzword] by shdowhawk · · Score: 1

    New tech seems to be paying well. As a person that keeps up to date on a lot of technologies, I've worked from networking, to coding, to security, and now full time DBA. The pay is good for what I do since I stick to newer "hot" technologies (or smaller unique high pay one-off jobs).

    I am currently working in a fortune 50 company for the last year, and IMO - I can tell you that the reason that "tech" people are not getting more money is because, quite literally, 30-50% of the staff is off shore people trying to get green cards. And I am not talking about small number of people. Instead of just offshoring things, people are bringing offshore workers in locally to say that they don't offshore their work. The local foreign workforce, along with fresh-out-of-school types, are doing all the "old timer" jobs like java development, xml parsing, db2 and mssql work. The high pay people are now team leads, architects, or using new fangled technologies like nosql, and html5, and python (not perl for command line), and all of those other "brand new" technologies to the industry. (note the sarcasm with "new fangled technologies").

    Add a bunch of people who are EXCITED to get paid $30,000 to the workforce ... and it brings the average down

  63. Re:Do you guys really make that much? by jandrese · · Score: 5, Insightful

    If your plumber fucks up you can end up with thousands of dollars in water damage. If your electrician fucks up, your house can burn down. That's why we pay them fairly well and insist that they become certified.

    I don't know why you think coding on a large project is easy either. The skillset required is not easy to find, and there are a whole lot of assholes who can make a total mess of your project and cost you thousands in delays and additional work because they don't know what they're doing. That's one of the big reasons you don't see as much coding outsourced these days. 5 or 10 years ago everybody was doing it, and also discovering that the product they got back was of poor quality compared to stuff from their in-house coders. It is very expensive to fix bad code.

    --

    I read the internet for the articles.
  64. perhaps part of the problem by v1 · · Score: 3, Insightful

    is that it's hard for a lot of managers to figure out who's valuable. Most smaller shops hire IT staff because they don't have the expertise in-house already. It's not like a cook that hires an assistant cook and can watch them and know if they are skilled or unskilled. I think most IT for smaller organizations are easy marks for unskilled IT, that can be incompetent and still appear valuable because the people doing the hiring and the managing can't properly assess a person's skills before OR after the hire.

    And I think this hurts the average pay. I've seen this happen a lot around here, where idiots are working IT for someone and the idiot moves on, leaving behind the managers to think that they need to find a replacement "as good as Tim", and are completely astounded to find that their new hire Jason actually knows what he's doing and is a massive improvement. Leaves them wondering "were we paying Tim too much, or are we paying Jason too little?"

    So now at least they know that good IT is worth paying more for, but the rest of the hiring pool out there that hasn't learned that lesson yet doesn't consider their IT all that valuable because they currently are employing an idiot and just have no idea how much more they could benefit from quality IT.

    --
    I work for the Department of Redundancy Department.
  65. Re:Do you guys really make that much? by cyber-vandal · · Score: 1

    Doing a shitty little web site in Wordpress for a local business is not the sort of coding we're talking about here. The idea that you don't have to write efficient code is quite frankly hilarious. I bet your websites are a real joy to use.

  66. Inconvenient Facts by Safety+Cap · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Want to cry in your soup?

    For the middle class, real wages haven't risen since 1978. (chart). Of course the upper class has made out like gangbusters.

    In other words, your buying power is the same as your Leisure Suit-wearing predecessors, whereas the rich have accumulated whole closets of never-been-used ivory-handled backscratchers.

    --
    Yeah, right.
    1. Re:Inconvenient Facts by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      THANK you!

      I was coming into here to post that I'd fucking KILL to get their wages.

      $39 an hour?!? And your complaining?!?!?!

      Hell, if I got HALF that, it'd be a massive raise!

      So in short IT workers, suck it the fuck up, you're getting paid more than the vast majority of society as is.

    2. Re:Inconvenient Facts by Macman408 · · Score: 1

      Why is there an assumption that inflation-adjusted wages must rise, either in general (chart in parent) or in IT (article)? For an individual employee, sure, they should rise over time as they gain more experience. But for the population as a whole I'd expect it to stay constant; as employees get older they earn more, but some retire, and they are replaced by inexperienced workers just starting their careers, earning much less. Since the average experience of the workforce is remaining the same, why shouldn't the average wage remain the same?

      What this seems to indicate more is that the supply and demand in the job market are fairly stable - thus wages are neither going up nor down.

    3. Re:Inconvenient Facts by jeff4747 · · Score: 2

      Why is there an assumption that inflation-adjusted wages must rise, either in general (chart in parent) or in IT (article)?

      Because productivity is much higher.

      So employees make more "stuff" per hour. That stuff gets sold, so the company makes more money in the same time.

      The way it used to work was those productivity gains resulted in wages for everyone going up. Now, only executive wages are going up. Those wages and various Wall-Street-related things are taking the entire productivity gain.

    4. Re:Inconvenient Facts by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If all inflation-adjusted income were flat, that would be fine. Well, not great as our economy is designed for growth, but at least it would mean the economy were in stable steady-state. Which it isn't. Economic output per person is increasing. Wages are increasing... just only for C-level executives. The proportion of wealth going to the little guy is going down dramatically; that's the problem. In theory, with the economy growing, as everyone gets more productive due to improvements in technology and other sources of improved efficiency, everyone's lives should be getting better. For the most part, this isn't happening. (Of course, "lives getting better" is rather difficult to quantify well due to new pervasive technologies like the internet. The point is poorer people's lives aren't getting anywhere near as much better as you would expect given in overall increase in productivity.)

    5. Re:Inconvenient Facts by Em+Adespoton · · Score: 1

      Actually, while this is true, most productivity gain goes to the investors -- which can be anyone who thought to take a risk on that company.

      The other side is, this means that previously, IT jobs were overvalued, and have now stabilized (face it: when everyone's using IT, productivity gains approach nil year-over-year).

      The other thing this fails to point out is that "IT" is about as specific as "blue collar" -- meaning I bet the curve isn't the same for people working in a repair shop, people maintaining complex machinery, people managing an enterprise network, geek squad employees, industry analysts, systems architects, people selling apps on the app store, facebook employees, etc. Some things have become commoditized jobs, while others are still niche and creating a unique curve.

    6. Re:Inconvenient Facts by egcagrac0 · · Score: 1

      I'd fucking KILL to get their wages.

      Hell, if I got HALF that, it'd be a massive raise!

      So invest a few evenings in getting a cert or two. The guys on desktop support are making about half that.

      Self improvement requires less dry cleaning than homicide. (Sometimes.)

    7. Re:Inconvenient Facts by shutdown+-p+now · · Score: 1

      Because average productivity rises over time. Did you see the graph he linked to?

    8. Re:Inconvenient Facts by shutdown+-p+now · · Score: 2

      So in short IT workers, suck it the fuck up, you're getting paid more than the vast majority of society as is.

      That indicates the problem with the "vast majority of the society", not a problem with IT workers complaining. So instead of us sucking it the fuck up, you should join us complaining.

    9. Re:Inconvenient Facts by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      This is so true. Those -with- have funneled the wealth towards themselves, at the expense of every one else. It is honorable to work hard every work day, and to sit back and smile on your days off, knowing that you've made a positive contribution to the society that you are part of. Shame that that cash as such is as green as cash sliced off the river of money that you happen to have access to. What is astounding is that the 1% apparently conned almost half of americans to vote for someone that thinks companies are people too. Here, the difference is Morality. Corporate morality is purely financial. Personal morality is way different. Have we decided now that corporations are not people too?

    10. Re:Inconvenient Facts by Macman408 · · Score: 1

      So what if productivity is higher? These are hourly figures - people are paid per hour of work, not per widget produced. If productivity goes up, they still work the same number of hours.

      In an IT example, let's say experienced worker Alice writes a script that makes her job 10% faster - she can now produce 10% more websites, or fix 10% more computers, or administer 10% more servers, or 10% more whatever in the same time. The company may very well see fit to give her a nice raise, because she and all her coworkers are now producing 10% more output. She retires, and the company hires a new employee to replace her, Bob. Bob is producing 10% more output than they would have expected for an inexperienced new hire, thanks to Alice's script. Does that mean that Bob should therefore be paid 10% more? He's not working any harder than a new hire would have the year before - the tools are just better.

      An increase in productivity for most companies means an increase in profit, nothing more. For any employees that are directly responsible for that increase in ways above and beyond what is expected of them in their normal duties, the company might provide a bonus or a raise. Beyond that, there's no reason that an increase in productivity should mean an increase in wages across the board.

    11. Re:Inconvenient Facts by jeff4747 · · Score: 0

      If productivity goes up, they still work the same number of hours.

      Because they are getting more done, meaning the boss needs to hire fewer people.

      Up until 1980-ish, that the workers shared in that savings - their wages went up.

      That broke down in the 1980s. Since then productivity gains have not resulted in higher wages.

      In an IT example, let's say experienced worker Alice writes a script that makes her job 10% faster - she can now produce 10% more websites, or fix 10% more computers, or administer 10% more servers, or 10% more whatever in the same time.

      Which means the company can hire 10% fewer IT workers. That's the part you're missing.

      An increase in productivity for most companies means an increase in profit, nothing more.

      Now. But that has only been the case in the last 30 years. In the previous 100-ish years, wages and productivity rose in tandem.

    12. Re:Inconvenient Facts by Rich0 · · Score: 1

      Actually, while this is true, most productivity gain goes to the investors -- which can be anyone who thought to take a risk on that company.

      Anyone who thought to take a risk on that company, and who had the means to actually do so.

      There are lots of things I'd love to invest in, but I don't have surplus income 30x the poverty line so that I can dabble in tech stocks while not sitting in my yacht.

      No issues with paying back investors, but there is WAY too much disparity between working and owning.

    13. Re:Inconvenient Facts by sjames · · Score: 1

      Because GDP/capita has gone up by a factor of 5 or 6 in that timeframe.

    14. Re:Inconvenient Facts by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I've seen this been said a lot of time, but what is the definition of tbe US middle class? I'm pretty sure that what we in Europe call middle class has had a pretty good rise in wages compared to the "lower class". And there's more or less no "upper class" in US...

    15. Re:Inconvenient Facts by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      But now I have 18 gbit internet access into my house, access to all accumulated human knowledge at my fingertips, etc. It's not so easy to compare.

    16. Re:Inconvenient Facts by tehcyder · · Score: 1

      Why is there an assumption that inflation-adjusted wages must rise, either in general (chart in parent) or in IT (article)? For an individual employee, sure, they should rise over time as they gain more experience. But for the population as a whole I'd expect it to stay constant; as employees get older they earn more, but some retire, and they are replaced by inexperienced workers just starting their careers, earning much less. Since the average experience of the workforce is remaining the same, why shouldn't the average wage remain the same?

      What this seems to indicate more is that the supply and demand in the job market are fairly stable - thus wages are neither going up nor down.

      Except in a recession a country's economy grows. In the last thirty years there have not been many quarters with no growth. If the overall economy grows you would expect everyone's wealth/salary to be growing too. Whereas, in fact, it just goes to making the rich richer, in broad terms.

      --
      To have a right to do a thing is not at all the same as to be right in doing it
    17. Re:Inconvenient Facts by Stiletto · · Score: 1

      An increase in productivity for most companies means an increase in profit, nothing more. For any employees that are directly responsible for that increase in ways above and beyond what is expected of them in their normal duties, the company might provide a bonus or a raise. Beyond that, there's no reason that an increase in productivity should mean an increase in wages across the board.

      You've concisely summed up what's wrong with corporate America and why labor should be organizing against it.

    18. Re:Inconvenient Facts by euroq · · Score: 1

      The point is that IT is in demand and the wages haven't gone up, not that IT workers are whining.

      --
      Just because the U.S. is a republic does not mean it is not a democracy. Democracy/republic are not mutually exclusive.
    19. Re:Inconvenient Facts by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Actually real compensation has risen if you include the value of non-cash benefits like health insurance.

  67. I don't like this analogy. by Raven42rac · · Score: 1

    I feel this if then statement is oversimplified. The answer is probably external factors making the competitive wage for the jobs remain flat in a recession economy. But that's not sensational enough for /. is it? Perhaps if we got Rob Enderle to declare something dead, that'll get a shitload of clicks.

    --
    I hate sigs.
  68. Automation? by AmazinglySmooth · · Score: 1

    Did automation make IT easier? It seems to me that the tools for IT are easier than they were 10-15 years ago.

    1. Re:Automation? by RabidReindeer · · Score: 1

      Did automation make IT easier? It seems to me that the tools for IT are easier than they were 10-15 years ago.

      Yep. A lot of good tools.

      So now we're expected to use them to do things that were too complicated to do 10-15 years ago.

      In the 1950's you read a punched card, moved/computed with the data, wrote something out. End of UI.

      In the 1980's you had to supply logic to allow users to get things done from the menu, the toolbar, maybe a popup, and with luck, 1-2 other places.

      In the 1990s' you had to make it work with the Internet.

      In the 2000's, you had to make it interactive using AJAX.

      These days, we have to make it all cloud-friendly.

      The reward for being able to do something well is more work.

  69. Total compensation is not flat by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Most tech jobs include health insurance. The total cost of health insurance premiums paid by employer and employee has been steadily and significantly increasing for a decade, and much of the increase has been covered by employers. There's your raise! (At least it's tax-free . . . for now!)

  70. Re:Do you guys really make that much? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You think being an average non-trial lawyer is that hard? or the daily grind of your average family doctor is all that taxing? Most non-manual labour, or so-called "skilled", jobs are only as hard and/or as fun as you make them, and only as taxing as the years of qualifications/learning that you require to not be in over your head.

    Most coders (probably yourself included) are sitting on a lifetime of experience tinkering and working with systems. That's why coders are generally well-ish paid. Most people would be in way over their heads if thrown into a coding job, because most people are not coders in their spare time.

    If coders were able to organize of a larger scale, or if forced into profession-hood through the kinds of personal liability that earned lawyers and doctors their status, then we'd probably be able to demand even higher compensation.

  71. Physicians by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    How about an estimate for changes in physicians income over the last decade. Presumably you would see a decline as most medical work in this country is paid by medicare or third party insurers who have a lot of leverage in reducing what they pay out.
    Incidentally in some countries like the UK, most physicians are government employees.

  72. Saturation. by jrronimo · · Score: 1

    There are a lot of tech people out there for not quite as many jobs. The market's saturated, so pay doesn't need to rise. That's my take...

  73. Flat relative to what? by MobyDisk · · Score: 1

    Everyone else's wages have gone down over the last 10 years. If your wage has remained flat, you are one of the lucky ones! The article mentions that STEM workers have a 3.4% unemployment rate. That is less than half the national average, they are doing well in that area too! This is like a billionaire complaining that they are *still* stuck as a billionaire.

  74. Simple economics by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I work in this field. We're not adding more value and we're not lowering costs therefore compensation isn't increasing. Consulting rates on the other hand aren't flat.

  75. I didn't think it was that high by roc97007 · · Score: 1

    If the average is actually up from the end of the dot com boom, even through the bust and the current down economy, I think that's actually doing pretty good. I would have expected average salaries to have gone down during that time. I and a lot of my associates are not making anywhere near what we were making during the boom. The difference isn't some paltry .3 percent, either.

    But besides all that, if you're looking for a reason why IT salaries haven't gone up, it's because we're competing against offshore personnel with workstations balanced on card tables. And *that* situation is due to companies still not realizing the true cost of outsourcing, factoring in the added cost of doing business.

    --
    Oliver's law of assumed responsibility: If you're seen fixing it, you will be blamed for breaking it.
  76. Year 2000 is the wrong baseline by mokeyboy · · Score: 1

    The use of the year 2000 distorts the argument as it was an abnormal high point for earnings. In 1999 and 2000, IT salaries benefited greatly out of all proportion to the productivity gain the workers provided to companies due to the scramble for Y2K compliance. A longer baseline going back to 1997 and treating 2000 as an outlier would provide a very different picture that is more likely to reflect real trends in hourly rates etc.

  77. bubble, no bubble by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    In 2000 there was an IT bubble. Now, not only is there no bubble, but there is a large supply of IT workers and a small supply of jobs.

    Supply and demand.

  78. 2 reasons, outsourcing and effeciency. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    1.) There is an artificial ceiling in the US (at a certain price point, outsourcing becomes more relevant, and for seemingly dirt cheap.. these numbers are US based only... the expansion of tech in a shrinking global economy, must reflect a significant boom in other nations. E.G. Ukraine, PI, and India)
    2.) Tech is somewhat self defeating, it's about driving effeciency, which cuts out waste, and renders one another irrelevant. Eventually for instance, all Windows OS will be served on VM and be 'just add internet' - why have 1 skilled helpdesk per location fixing local issues, when you can have 1 sysadmin fixing everyone's issue everywhere and throw away devices.

  79. Re:Do you guys really make that much? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If you'd clean monkey cages for $40 an hour, why aren't you working as a plumber for $120 an hour?

    Plumbers charge $120/hour but they don't make $120/hour.

  80. Boo hoo by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Real wages for most Americans have been declining for the last 40 years.

  81. Re:Do you guys really make that much? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I don't get out of bed for under $65 an hour programming now and I work in a lower than average wage area. I get paid a lot because someone hired a bunch of $40/hr programmers who screwed it all up and need someone to fix it. There's plenty of people making twice what I make out there, especially in the larger markets.

  82. Re:Hate to say this but: It's because of self-este by sapgau · · Score: 1

    Indeed

  83. Re:Quit complaining- staying even is good these da by AwesomeMcgee · · Score: 5, Insightful

    the "Quit complaining and count your blessings" demands are what we've been getting told for decades by those at the top, "Cry me a river", the sad part is now we repeat it to eachother, ignorant of the fact that they were merely telling us that crap to protect their own raising income. Look at the year-over-year income rise % since the 60s, it is amazingly ridiculous how much CEO income raises have gone up in % over the years, not in total. Also look at the % of population in the middle class vs. % of population in the lower class since the 60s. Come back when you think we should all just keep sucking it up and aren't convinced if we continue to "Quit complaining" the middle class won't be gone altogether.

    Last quarter the economy's profits grew quite a bit over previous quarters, however hiring remained flat. Quit complaining and work more hours, at least you've got a job right?

  84. The reason is simple... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Because most people in the boardroom, HR, Fiscal, and other non-IT departments don't "get" IT. So we're the red-headed step-children for any non-IT company, and they expect us to do more with less. They cut the budget to barebones, all while asking for more and more PC's to be installed in offices with people that already have three computers in their office, all with dual 24" top of the line LED monitors, and a "personal" printer that's designed for use by at least 20 people. We also have to go from one "emergency" to another, only to find it was usually the fault of the user, which we can't say to them under the threat of getting written up, suspended or pink slipped, then have to break away because someone in the board room just had to get that new mouse and because they left a thinly veiled threat of a pink slip if you're not there in 10 minutes, only to have him complain to your boss about how you've got dust all over yourself from doing a wiring job in a glorified broom closet that hasn't been cleaned since Woodstock, only then to get scolded by that boss for not getting the wiring job done fast enough. When something breaks, everyone else just expect us to magically fix things, regardless of our budget, how many Red Bull's we've drank on our fourth double shift this week on little or no sleep, then they expect us to come over to their house to fix their personal IT problems because their kid got some song off an iTunes knockoff site in Russia, and complain when we say no (also under the occasional threat of a pink slip), especially when we haven't had a meal in a week that doesn't involve Hot Pockets, pizza or McDonald's, a full night's sleep is a thing of the past, and we've only got vague recollections of that thing called "a life".

    And people wonder why IT technicians have one of the highest burnout rates of any white-collar profession, frequently leaving their doctor's office with prescriptions to treat stress, anxiety, high cholesterol, high blood pressure, insomnia, and whatever else...

  85. IT is the new factory worker. by Lumpy · · Score: 1, Insightful

    Anyone interested in continuing economic increases have been sliding in their career now. I left IT 6 years ago for Smart buildings and High end Corporate AV. I'm in high demand and can dictate my job perks and salary. I'm starting to learn something else as a lot of IT and CS people are now eyeballing my industry.. So it's time to learn and start the slide to something else before this field becomes a mess like IT has.

    And no, I am not giving details, if you cant figure this out on your own, you are not smart enough to do the job.

    --
    Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
    1. Re:IT is the new factory worker. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Call Bullshiz on you azzhole.

    2. Re:IT is the new factory worker. by monkeykoder · · Score: 1

      So you're still in IT it's just called something different...

    3. Re:IT is the new factory worker. by Lumpy · · Score: 1

      Says the unemployed illiterate...

      --
      Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
    4. Re:IT is the new factory worker. by Lumpy · · Score: 1

      How am I still in IT? IT staff people don't write custom software or design systems that handle digital and analog video so simply that even a CEO can use the system without having the secretary come in and turn it all on.

      Or do you have zero idea how smart buildings and High end AV work?

      --
      Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
    5. Re:IT is the new factory worker. by monkeykoder · · Score: 1

      And how is that inherently different from writing custom software to monitor networks so easy to use any idiot could do it?

  86. There's a point you get to... by Synerg1y · · Score: 1

    Where you have to make a decision to try and move up from the ground level or not, the truth is that working at ground 0 and being good at it, you can hit your cap pretty quickly. You can become a contractor to try and earn somewhat more, or go fully independent as a consultant at which point your running your own business. Or you can try for that masters and try to move up into management, IT Mgr is typically around 100-120k, which is quite a bit higher than most techs make, even the higher up ones. Senior developers can make about that, I've heard of senior admins making more than that, but management is almost a guarantee (unless you hook up w some sub-par employers, but that applies to all tiers of IT).

    The formula isn't as much skill for pay as responsibility for pay. The more you "own" the higher your pay should be, owning a team of engineers is more responsibility intensive than owning your code parts of a program. The personality types that best manage are different form the personality types that are the engineers, so that probably contributes to some of the "flatness". Especially since most companies no longer promote from within (every 2-3y job turnover theory), it's becoming more important to be able to sell yourself as a tech. The worst decision anyone can make in the current IT industry is a 10 year gig: your skills will be outdated 90% of the time, and your pay relatively flat.

  87. If science is so important why are the wages flat? by ThatsMyNick · · Score: 1

    I think the question is absurd. If something important, should wages keep rising? Is there a case where this has been happening (or nothing ever has been important?).

  88. This is a slice of a bigger phenomenon... by Genda · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Y'all are making excuses for a much larger phenomenon. The implosion of the middle class. Here's a comparison of wage growth for Americans from 1967 until 2011. Look at the various jumps in the curve. You can see the big jump in the late sixties of the lowest quartile, the clear results of the war on poverty. The economic doldrums at the end of the Carter Administration. The sudden increase during the Reagan first term, but take special notice of how the rise benefits the upper quintile and even more so the top 5% (and if you could see the top 1% and top 0.01% I think you'd see something shocking.) The subsequent fall during the senior Bush Administration followed by the boom of the Clinton years (and make no mistake, the booms during both Reagan and Clinton involved huge economic expansions in industry, heavy industry for Reagan and information industries for Clinton. Then junior Bush's Terms, and here's where it get's interesting. Notice the steady decline in advancement. The majority of Americans are seeing their wages crashing towards stagnation or worse. In fact looking at the lowest quintile, over the last 10 years they've had a 20% drop in real wealth. Even the first quintile has remained stagnant with extreme fluctuation. So this is not just an IT thing. The only folks to see dramatic increase in personal wealth over the last 10 years I in a group smaller than the top 1%.

    While that was going on, the real wealth of Americans at large has been disappearing. Here's a brilliant lecture on the looming collapse of the Middle Class and the economic forces responsible for the situations we all face today. Contrary to pundits conversations Americans spend significantly fewer inflation adjusted dollars on food, clothes, appliances and cars. Where they are getting killed is Cost of Housing, revolving credit and loan debt, Medical Insurance and drugs, Child Day Care, Cost of Fuel/Energy, that and there are new expenses surrounding electronic gadgets that have been a steadily growing part of the cost of living since the late 80s.

    The Banks (both in banking, loans and real estate), Big Medicine/Pharma, and Energy have put the American Family in such a precarious position, that any small disruption or disturbance results in almost immediate financial collapse. The critical events facing Americans are Death of a spouse, Injury or Serious Illness, Divorce and extended Unemployment. Any of these (singly or in combination) are enough to initiate a cycle of debt, penalties and ultimate bankruptcy. Add to this growing inflation and the erosion of our savings and investments, and you can see that the American Family is under extraordinary financial stress. The American dream for a growing population is just being able to get by.

    1. Re:This is a slice of a bigger phenomenon... by DNS-and-BIND · · Score: 1

      The middle class, otherwise known as the bourgeois, has been a class enemy for decades. How's it bad they're being wiped out and forced to join the working class?

      --
      Shutting down free speech with violence isn't fighting fascism. It IS fascism!
    2. Re:This is a slice of a bigger phenomenon... by DigiShaman · · Score: 1

      Well, yes! Anytime a nation faces inflation, the cab between the rich and poor grows farther apart with the middle class split down the side. Unless you're upper-middle class, you wealth will shrink as you have no assets and investments that will grow with said inflation.

      Obama wants to inflate our nation out of debt and change the base worth of wealth to help the poor. In fact long term, he's doing the exact 100% opposite whether he realizes it or not. Because again, the wealthy can weather inflation where as the poor and middle class can't. The whole process ends up being one giant death spiral for the nation and global economy at large.

      --
      Life is not for the lazy.
    3. Re:This is a slice of a bigger phenomenon... by DigiShaman · · Score: 1

      BTW, sorry for the grammar, I forgot about how shitty iOS text auto complete is. Grrrr!

      --
      Life is not for the lazy.
    4. Re:This is a slice of a bigger phenomenon... by AK+Marc · · Score: 1

      Because again, the wealthy can weather inflation where as the poor and middle class can't.

      Take two people. One makes $1 a year working (living on $100 per year, borrowing $99 per year to live), and one rent-seeks from his "saved" $1,000,000, making $10,000 a year. So, massive inflation hits, and the rent seeker is left with $1,000,000 in cash, as before. But the worker sees his wages go from $1 per year to $1,000,000 per year. The worker's previous debt is wiped out (it's not explicitly paid off, but is now a few minutes of work from the worker. The cost of living would have gone up to $100,000,000 for both the worker and rent seeker. The rent seeker is now poor, and the poor person is no worse off than before.

      The *only* time inflation hurts the poor is when the rent seekers are the ones paying the poor, so they support cost inflation, so long as wage inflation doesn't match.

      The reason the myth persists that inflation hurts the poor is because inflation hurts the rich, so the rich spend billions lying until morons believe the rich are trying to prevent inflation to protect the poor.

    5. Re:This is a slice of a bigger phenomenon... by Genda · · Score: 1

      Actually the middle class as traditionally displayed in the Census Data is the middle (3rd) quintile and is the "Working Class" usually with sufficient education to hold professional jobs and higher end service work. It was Adam Smith who said that the one key thing to be concerned about with a "Free Market" was the willful preservation of a healthy middle class because they are the heart of your economic engine. Lose them and be certain that you will lose your economy. So the concentration of wealth, like the concentration of global influence, begins to precipitate its own collapse by building on an increasingly unstable system, and at some point as the whole thing comes crashing down. In our economic system the government is the mediator, whether you believe it should be or not, that is one of its jobs in this system. The wholesale purchase of our government by the top 0.001% has created a predictably hostile environment to the poor but especially to the middle class. America can not survive as we know it in the absence of a healthy and productive middle class.

    6. Re:This is a slice of a bigger phenomenon... by Genda · · Score: 1

      If you look at the charts in my reference, you'll see even the upper class, even most of the folks in the first quintile, will suffer dramatic loss of worth. The breaking line for win and lose has been set so high that far fewer than 5% of the population will do really well. Folks who are lucky enough not to suffer a serious disease, divorce, put too many kids through college (or have a huge brood to begin with) or experience a the death of a spouse or business partner will slowly creep up as long as leverage every possible financial instrument at their disposal. Folks who aren't as well informed about how to properly diversify and plan for an unstable and unhealthy economy or experience any combination of the personal disasters I mentioned will find themselves in a death spiral of financial hardship, growing debt, credit failure, property loss and ultimately poverty. The system as it currently stands is profoundly slanted against the vast majority of Americans.

  89. H1B Visas by Douglas001 · · Score: 1

    Because corporations lobby government every year to issue more and more H1B Visas in an effort to keep wages of all types of engineers down. They claim there are not enough of them however it is a viscous cycle, the more depressed the wages are made to be the less young people are drawn to the field and it becomes a self fulfilling prophecy.

  90. Re:Do you guys really make that much? by AwesomeMcgee · · Score: 1

    Same here, fun times making what was great money as a lad, but what I knew how to do then was an absolute joke compared to what I know how to do now. There is a definite scale to this shit and making stuff last and reworkable takes a skillset all it's own only learned through years of practice, and frankly many people with years of practice still can't do it. The extra money is because it's bloody hard to find someone who can do this stuff well and won't be a bigger pain than they're worth.

  91. Exactly. by Narcocide · · Score: 1

    And *THAT* is the sole cause of the stagnation of IT salaries. The current economy is just a scapegoat.

  92. Re:Do you guys really make that much? by 0111+1110 · · Score: 2

    In my state it takes years to get a plumbing license and in order to do that you have to work as plumbers assistant for years etc. I'd much rather write code for $40/hr or even $10-$15/hr. Not that that is an option for me. My aging degree is in EE not CS.

    I've always loved coding. Mainly c/c++ and assembly. I've always imagined that if I were to go back to college for a CS degree and somehow manage to get a job as a programmer that I would start to hate it anyway and I didn't want to learn to hate programming. Actually this was based on some persuasive posts over the years from professional programmers right here on slashdot.

    Also, when I graduated in the early 90s it simply wasn't possible, as far as I could determine, to get a job with only a CS degree where I lived. Even getting a masters wasn't enough. You needed a minimum of 2 years of real world professional programming experience to make it past HR. Period. I've never been much good with people and don't do well selling myself at job interviews. So it is and was beyond hopeless.

    For the next decade after college I would search the job market from time to time, but if anything the situation just seemed worse, requiring experience and certifications of all kinds in languages that I didn't like or respect in addition to the other requirements that seemed impossible. It just seemed that there were already enough experienced programmers in the market. I guess there just wasn't any need for inexperienced ones, regardless of what degrees they had earned.

    --
    Quite an experience to live in fear, isn't it? That's what it is to be a slave.
  93. Because that's what you'd expect... by DragonWriter · · Score: 1

    If Tech Is So Important, Why Are IT Wages Flat?

    Because tech has been just as important over the whole period over which IT wages were observed to be flat, and because wages across the economy have been flat in the time period studied. So, the results are pretty much what you'd expect.

  94. well IT / tech needs apprenticeships / trades by Joe_Dragon · · Score: 2

    well IT / tech needs apprenticeships / trades schools and not theory based degrees.

  95. Oh bite me. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Capitalism, woe is us.

    Its called your in world economy and the tech you worked on, those who worked on it before you, has enabled nearly anyone in the world to compete with you.

    Face it, most of IT people have jobs someone else can do elsewhere in the world and do it as well if not better and cheaper. Yeah there are some fun horror stories with off shore, but guess what got some local stories too.

    It really comes down to this, the internet provides the means to make your work mobile whereas many "factory" jobs have to be done, well at the factory.

    Lastly, labor usually vastly over estimates their worth. I know because I am labor and I do,

    Your idea of how capitalism works is so jaded but it fits with the herd mentality race to the bottom mentality of this site.

  96. Re:Quit complaining- staying even is good these da by Lehk228 · · Score: 1

    staying flat while profits CxO compensation skyrocket is not "good" it's just less bad so far than other employment sectors are doing

    --
    Snowden and Manning are heroes.
  97. because by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    1. if there is an over-supply then wages will be low.
    2. A lot of non-IT people that influence hiring decisions don't know anything about IT and just see it as an expense and think that it's not hard. They don't know that there's a difference between a good IT staff member and a bad one.
    3. If the economy isn't doing well then less people have extra money to blow on attracting good employees.
    4. Because people undervalue the work that IT does. It's only when it goes down that people see the difference between a competent IT staff member and an incompetent one.
    5. Competition - outsourcing, cloudsourcing, etc..

  98. Negotiators by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Because IT people are terrible negotiators.

  99. Just because by Swampash · · Score: 1

    a field is important, that doesn't mean the people who work in it are.

    During the industrial revolution assembly-line workers were the most important employees in the world, but that didn't mean they were on massive salaries.

    IT is a field with almost zero barriers to entry. Any mook can get an MCSE and be a "IT professional". And you know what? Any mook does.

    1. Re:Just because by DigiShaman · · Score: 1

      Who's kidding who here? If you are resourceful enough to get the certs, chances are you're also resourceful at getting brain dumps (cheat sheets) online. Any respectable company with competent IT dept is going to drill you on scenarios and other Q/As along with a list of references that they will call. The certs only serve to backup what you are already supposed to know via real world experience.

      --
      Life is not for the lazy.
  100. Re:Do you guys really make that much? by 0111+1110 · · Score: 2

    I'm not a script kiddie. I have an EE degree and absolutely loved writing assembly code as a teenager and writing C++ code with inline assembly, making small games etc. I got an A in every programming course I took in college and spent way too much time writing code to the detriment of my math and physics courses. Writing code is fun. It's like playing. I am of course jealous that you get payed to play.

    What I want to know is how you got your first job out of college? Did you know someone? If I had graduated with my pathetic EE degree (worthless for actually getting a job IME) and found that there were programming jobs all over the place that only required a BS in CS I would have just gone back and got a CS degree and then landed myself a job writing code, and maybe I would be making 80k/year now instead of 10k. I tried everything I could think of but there was just nothing available for someone without professional experience. I looked both in Florida (where I went to school) and Boston (where I'm from), but such jobs simply did not exist as far as I could tell. Or if they did exist they certainly weren't being advertised anywhere. You had to know someone and I didn't know anyone. I was utterly defeated by the whole, "Can't get a job without experience and can't get experience without a job" situation. All of you seemed to have overcome that somehow. I'd love to know what your secret was.

    I guess it's those sorts of experiences that have made me a bitter, cynical "life sucks; then you die" kind of guy. Or at least more than I would have been. Actually if someone had told me that getting a job right out of college without experience was pretty much impossible, well I would have still gone (I liked it), but I wouldn't have been so disenchanted with the pointlessness of job hunting afterward and I might have come up with some plan for actually making a living in a way that doesn't totally suck. Maybe ideas for starting a business. Although before the internet that was quite a bit harder. Now it's the only form of work that seems worth doing anyway. Wage slavery tends to suck.

    The two most imporant lessons I've learned in life. These aren't universal. They just apply to me.

    1. Getting a job doing something you don't totally hate is impossible. Getting a high paid job is impossible. At least if you have to rely on someone actually hiring you. Starting your own business is another matter. For that you just need money. Before the internet quite a lot of money. Not so much now for certain types of businesses.

    2. Getting a girlfriend is impossible.

    --
    Quite an experience to live in fear, isn't it? That's what it is to be a slave.
  101. Re:Do you guys really make that much? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    >Writing code is easy and frankly kind of fun

    If coding is easy, you aren't challenging yourself. If you aren't challenging yourself, you won't make the high wages. It is fun though.

    >Now I think I understand why prices in the US are so absurdly high.

    Yes, cost of living varies from country to country. That's why it's a gold mine when someone comes over here to work, where a decent burger costs $5-$10. They save their money, bring it home and live like kings where a burger still costs a buck.

    >when you aren't even expected to know assembly language or heavily optimize anything

    I think assembler is only still required for boot loaders, but I could be mistaken. Optimization is important in many cases (at least the high dollar cases).

    >Just write clear, well organized, easy to understand code

    You should always do that. You'd be surprised how many people won't follow the coding standards that are in the damn unit they are working on.

    >I would *definitely* write code for $10/hour. Maybe even $8. I wouldn't need $40.

    That also generally requires getting up in the morning, paying for decent work clothes, going to the office and writing what *other* people want you to write. You can't just write 10 goto 10 all day.

    >Of course plumbers don't deserve to make $125/hour and electricians don't deserve to make $75/hour either but they do.

    Depends on if they are a good plumber. I'll come over and do your plumbing for only $100 a hour but I don't know what the hell I'm doing. They also have to be certified and insured.

    So obviously this is a troll. If you actually knew how to code enough to earn $40 / hr, you wouldn't be doing a job that makes $10-$12 an hour, "when I'm lucky."

  102. It galls people to pay a living wage... by anyaristow · · Score: 1

    It galls people to pay a living wage to people they don't respect. It doesn't help when so many "in IT" work so hard at earning that disrespect.

  103. Re:Do you guys really make that much? by 0111+1110 · · Score: 1

    That may all be true, but the fact is there are people talking about getting 80k jobs right out of college. I'm still not convinced that they are not aliens from another planet. Or at least another country. But, if true, it cannot just be what you learn from working in the field for years that makes them worth so much.

    Keep in mind that intelligent people tend to get better at anything they do every day. So your argument applies to every intellectual pursuit. Not just programming. People with experience are worth more. I don't doubt that. What I doubt is that anyone is really worth $40/hr for anything. Maybe doctors. In some countries people, intelligent people, will work for a whole month for less than $40. Even doctors in some cases.

    --
    Quite an experience to live in fear, isn't it? That's what it is to be a slave.
  104. Minimum Exempt Salary by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You may find some interesting correlations if you compare that wage to the hourly wage at which one is exempt from overtime pay.

  105. hardly flamebait by ganjadude · · Score: 1

    flamebait? hardly.... Just telling how it is by me

    what mode doesnot matter but by either train (10 min drive to the train station) or car (an hour on the thruway)

    --
    have you seen my sig? there are many others like it but none that are the same
    1. Re:hardly flamebait by AvitarX · · Score: 1

      I didn't think you were flaimbait, I was genuinely curious, as I've found that even in the city things are about an hour away if you aren't a short walk.

      The area you described sounded shockingly livable for it's proximity to income and I was curious.

      --
      Wow, sent an e-mail as suggested when clicking on "use classic" banner, and got a fast response that addressed my msg
    2. Re:hardly flamebait by ganjadude · · Score: 1

      I was refering to the mod, not you with that, my apologies but yes, I am in the hudson valley and it is a great place to live

      --
      have you seen my sig? there are many others like it but none that are the same
  106. Salaries are booming for me! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I live in a developing country and salaries are definitely booming. The problem is that americans and europeans make just about what the market can bear already. Eventually salaries will flatten out here too and move elsewhere until there is some sort of parity in the world.

  107. Re:Do you guys really make that much? by 0111+1110 · · Score: 2

    Then you and your friend either suck, or live in a shithole. It's really that simple.

    Either that or you are just overpaid and very, very spoiled.

    Where in the hell do you live? Arkansas?

    A suburb of Boston.

    Which doesn't mean you're any good at it.

    Never said I was, but the fact that you make shitloads of money doing it doesn't mean you are good at it either. In fact it doesn't mean shit except that you are one rich motherfucker.

    Blah blah blah. Spoken like somebody who hasn't done jack shit in the real world. My projects range from 4 to 12 million lines of high level code. I'll give you complex. Yeah, I was writing my own assemblers and tools (and making good use of them too) back in the day.. but anybody who works with current production level code in anything but the most trivial system knows what a pain in the ass so-called "high level" code can be. And yea, there are times when you can't just throw more hardware at it.

    Depending on how you define "jack shit" it is true that I haven't done it. I took the only job I could find outside of college. It wasn't manual labor, but it sucked and only paid $7.50/hr. I was just happy that I didn't have to spend the rest of my life waiting tables or working at a gas station or some shit like that. That I didn't have to clean toilets or deal with the public in some kind of retail job. What have you accomplished in your life besides huge stacks of 20 dollar bills that would reach the ceiling of your fancy house? Sucking corporate dick and doing what you are told working on someone else's project doesn't impress me all that much. Still better than my situation but not all that impressive in the scheme of things.

    Care to tell me why they shouldn't? I think it's just that you're such an inbred, lazy, arrogant little fuck that you couldn't do their jobs if your life depended on it.

    Actually I have done both plumbing and electrical work. Residential stuff. It's easy. In the sense that it isn't intellectually challenging. So I do know what I'm talking about. $125/hr to glue PVC pipe and solder copper joints is beyond ridiculous. I am lazy, but I think you are the arrogant one. I wasn't lazy when I graduated from college though. I had no problem working 12-16 hours a day and often did, but I wasn't able to work in any field that interested me. All of those jobs had already been taken by people with experience. Apparently a minimum of 2 years, but more typically 3-5.

    I'll bet you're fat

    Well since I'm an American that can be pretty much assumed. I'm about 30 pounds overweight, but I'm also in my early 40s. I wasn't more than 5-10 pounds overweight until my late 30s. In my 20s I was in very good condition. I ran, cycled and weight trained at the gym.

    ... that you masturbate quite a bit..

    Fuck you. Rich fuck like you whose had everything in life handed to you. You've just been lucky. Nothing more. At one time you also had no experience, but you probably knew someone and got hired that way. Not on the merits of your abiliites.

    and that your IQ, though you believe yourself to be brilliant, is within 1 std deviation of the norm.

    I never claimed to be some kind of genius. I just wanted to be able to get a job working for someone else after graduating from college doing something that didn't totally suck and ideally something that made use of all that studying I did in college. I took a bunch of IQ tests when I was around 18. IIRC I think I scored something like 137-139. So you're right. Not that great, but not below normal either. What did you score? 170 or something? That would just prove that being smart is unrelated to being a cunt.

    You just don't want to admit that luck had anything to do with your success and that you are the only one in the world

    --
    Quite an experience to live in fear, isn't it? That's what it is to be a slave.
  108. umm... remember the tech bubble by sakti · · Score: 1

    2000 was at the height of the tech bubble. So any comparison to it is horribly skewed.

    --
    "It is better to die on one's feet than to live on one's knees." - Albert Camus
  109. Re:Do you guys really make that much? by jeff4747 · · Score: 0

    From reading your posts, it appears you have the social skills of a small woodland creature.

    You should probably work on that instead of thinking that the "right" degree will instantly get you a job. It's also quite helpful on that "girlfriend" problem.

    My degree is in Biology. I used to get paid quite well to write code, but now I'm getting paid well to tell other people to write code. (No girlfriend though. Got a wife instead)

    When we interview people, their social abilities are actually quite important. We're hiring someone to join our team and work closely with everyone else on the team.

    Not the world's best programmer? I can probably work with you on that. I'm already expecting any entry level employee will need additional training.

    Poor social skills? I can't really fix that.

  110. Re:Do you guys really make that much? by swillden · · Score: 1

    If you can write readable, efficient, well-designed code, test it well, and do it reasonably quickly and without a lot of supervision, I'll hire you right now for some part-time work, at significantly more than $10 per hour. I don't care where you live; we can communicate over the Internet, and I'm sure I can find some way to pay you.

    --
    Note to ACs: I usually delete AC replies without reading them. If you want to talk to me, log in.
  111. Re:Do you guys really make that much? by 0111+1110 · · Score: 1

    Never done any web programming. So I wouldn't know. Web programming bores me. Well except maybe for coding a torrent client that uses some kind of exchange system like fairtorrent. That might be fun. Does anyone code web sites for anything other than the money?

    I prefer to code in C/C++ or assembly. I think Lisp and Scheme are kind of cool though. And Smalltalk and Objective-C and some functional languages like Haskell and Erlang and pretty much anything that compiles to tight, efficient machine code. I'm also interested in GPGPU languages especially as a way to run neural networks / connectionist programs.

    My original interest in programming was because of my interest in AI. I chose EE instead of CS because back in the 80s I thought that brain emulations were more likely to lead to AI than gigantic commonsense programs like Douglas Lenat's cyc project. And also because one of my EE profs persuaded me that the future of AI was more in hardware than software. He was working on an interesting massively parallel AI project of his own at the time and I respected his judgement.

    --
    Quite an experience to live in fear, isn't it? That's what it is to be a slave.
  112. Re:Do you guys really make that much? by 0111+1110 · · Score: 1

    Yup. My social skills suck. No question about that. But I never even got an interview to prove how much my social skills sucked. Because I didn't have the experience that was required by 100% of the ads I saw. And yes, after maybe a decade of working in an unrelated field I finally gave up hope of ever getting paid to do something I liked.

    --
    Quite an experience to live in fear, isn't it? That's what it is to be a slave.
  113. Tech == IT ??? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Is Tech really equal to IT. No technology beside IT ??

  114. Open source by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Blame open source. Software should be paid for. Not given away for free !!!

    1. Re:Open source by Ash-Fox · · Score: 1

      You can sell open source software just fine.

      --
      Change is certain; progress is not obligatory.
  115. Re:Do you guys really make that much? by 0111+1110 · · Score: 1

    Well it's not manual labor at least. Are you just being optimistic or do you know for a fact that it's possible to get hired as a programmer with no experience? It wouldn't help me anyway since I don't have a CS degree, but it is interesting.

    It's not really possible for me anymore. That ship has sailed. For many reasons that I don't want to get into here. But I do appreciate the advice, especially if you are not being overly optimistic. I was overly optimistic too when I just assumed that I would be able to find a job in my field after college. Eventually. I mean Electrical Engineering is not like studying anthropology or something. I figured there must be some need for Electrical Engineers right out of college. I had thought it would be at least someone practical. But I was wrong. I don't think I ever made the mistake of being overly optimistic about anything ever again.

    --
    Quite an experience to live in fear, isn't it? That's what it is to be a slave.
  116. Re:Do you guys really make that much? by shutdown+-p+now · · Score: 1

    So come over to the Bay Area or Puget Sound and find yourself a job where they'll snatch you up for $20/hr in a heartbeat if you can readly "write clear, well organized, easy to understand code". Why complain about it?

  117. Obvious. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Because, in technology, you are constantly under the threat and opposing leverage of having your job shipped off somewhere overseas for a fifth to a quarter of your salary, artificially keeping it low as your employer pulls from a labor-pool that extends into regions where they earn as much in a month as your groceries cost, because of where you live.

    I look forward to this happening to the teaching profession and all of those whiny bitches bawling over their teacher's wages and how "valuable they are to society" find that their wages and benefits drop even more, because we can stream live lessons in from India for a tenth the cost.

  118. Liquidity... this is a huge one. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    According to Warren Buffet, holding stock is normal, and high freq trading is a joke. His pal Charlie Munger, vice chairman at Warren Buffett's investment company Berkshire Hathaway. "Take the rapid trading by the computer geniuses with the computer algorithms...those people have all the social utility of a bunch of rats admitted to a grainery," I say we tax the heck out of it. Simply, it adds nothing to the social order.

  119. See this pearl of wisdom by cvtan · · Score: 1
    --
    Sorry, but gray text on gray background is making my eyes bleed.
  120. This is all about H1-B and most of you lost sight by b4dc0d3r · · Score: 3, Informative

    Adding to that, they are missing the top wage earners, who have retired, and are now including the n00bs who are earning entry level (for their position) wages.

    If we went through a recession, and the several bubbles which have burst, and you only track individuals, there are some people who have lost jobs but average earnings are up. This is not a debate about how much people earn, which is where most people above gp were talking about.

    The topic at hand is this - if IT is important to the world, why are they not paying IT people more?

    The assumptions in the questions are beyond idiotic. As a whole, should everyone in IT be paid more just because we are important to the economy? Or are we just displacing people and earning their salaries?

    How many people worked in tech, multiplied by their salaries? And compare that to now?

    The still sluggish U.S. economy gets most of the blame for this wage stagnation, but factors such as outsourcing and automation also contribute to the problem, say analysts.

    "IT salaries have not really kept pace with inflation," said Victor Janulaitis, the CEO of Janco Associates, which reports on IT wage compensation.

    In 2000, the average hourly wage was $37.27 in computer and math occupations for workers with at least a bachelor's degree. In 2011, it was $39.24, adjusted for inflation, according to a new report by the Economic Policy Institute (EPI).

    Adjusted for inflation, we are $2 ahead. How does Victor's quote mean anything when placed directly next to a quote disputing it? Adjusted, we are ahead.

    Why Are IT Wages Flat? First paragraph - outsourcing, automation, and economy. WTF are the rest of you babbling on about?

    That translates to an average wage increase of less than 0.5% a year.

    Including all of the people who took retirement or quit for other industries, and all of the n00bs. The rest is explained in the article, leading to b4dc0d3r's law: NEVER read an article with a headline posed in the form of a question.

    The real story is the EPI report, second link. Microsoft wants more H1-B visas, which is not new in the least. Microsoft wants to pay people from lower wage countries less money to work in the US. If you spot the conclusion, good for you. Microsoft wants to keep wages flat.

    As a large tech employer, and someone who is lobbying for cheap labor, it's kinda obvious to me that dcblogs (submitter) is intentionally misusing statistics, and a poorly written CNET article, to prattle on about H1-B visas.

  121. Re:Do you guys really make that much? by 0111+1110 · · Score: 1

    Is it really so easy for you guys to get hired that the only thing that matters is your ability? You don't even need a CS degree? Now that I don't believe.

    Of course the nice thing about programming is that you can prove yourself to some degree. Rather than going back to college and getting a CS degree maybe all I would need to do is write a large, complex program that I could send to potential employers. Something like a game maybe. Might take me a few years. Maybe longer. But I'd have something that would show what I am capable of. Although it's still difficult for me to picture a realistic scenario where I would even have a chance to show it off. It certainly wouldn't get me past HR or to any kind of an interview. Maybe if it became popular enough that the program and I both were slightly famous so that my name would immediately be recognized by someone.

    Obviously I don't know how to earn $40 an hour doing anything or I would be doing it. I don't think I've ever even earned half that much. A good friend of mine is about to get kicked out of his apartment because he can't manage to scrape together $700 each month to pay his rent on time. He can't seem to find any job at all. He's considering suicide as perhaps the only practical solution. And he actually has better social skills than I do and is probably equally intelligent, although he's not a techie/geek like me. I consider myself lucky compared to him and also compared to many of the people I see working retail and making no more than I do. At least I don't have to deal with the public (I'm shy and would hate that).

    I guess I was so convinced that the job market was a certain way in the 90s, it is difficult for me to accept that it has changed. Or maybe it hasn't changed. Maybe for everyone else the early to mid 90s were a time when it was dead easy to get a job in programming or electronics design with no experience at all right out of college. Maybe it was just me. That was certainly my reality. After this discussion I think I will at least have to check out Monster or whatever people are currently using for job hunting and try to verify some of the seemingly wild claims people are making here.

    If nothing else I don't really feel I'm properly qualified for a professional coding job. I do enjoy programming in c/c++/assembly but I haven't taken the same classes that CS majors took. Compiler design, algorithms... All that stuff. It would seem kind of cheeky of me to even apply for a programming job without having at least taken those same courses.

    What's almost funny about this discussion is that I would be considered fabulously wealthy--almost beyond imagination--in some countries. But to most of you guys I'm terribly poor.

    --
    Quite an experience to live in fear, isn't it? That's what it is to be a slave.
  122. Re:Do you guys really make that much? by 0111+1110 · · Score: 1

    I'm complaining about it because I'm still bitter about my experiences trying to find a job after college and failing badly. Not even coming close. Not even finding a single promising ad. Seeing this news story is a salt in the wounds kind of thing for me. I would love to live in the Puget Sound area. Probably one of the best places to live in the US I think. Although that and SF are both quite expensive. in terms of cost of living. Not that the Boston area is cheap either... I think the first thing I have to do is verify that what you guys are saying is actually true. I haven't been job hunting for a while. How do people do it these days? Is Monster still around or relevant?

    --
    Quite an experience to live in fear, isn't it? That's what it is to be a slave.
  123. The thing about IT.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    At least where I live, outsourcing is becoming more and more common. As a manager of an IT department, I can say that the number of business cards I receive in a given month are overwhelming offering cheap out-of-house IT service with names like "Geeks to go" or "Geeks on the run" or "Nerds at your door" or something lame like that.

    It's to the point where an organization almost can't justify keeping an IT person or team on staff full time when services are readily available with fast turn-around at little cost. It's downright threatening. Unfortunately, if you feel like jumping ship to go work for one of those services, you're looking at getting paid much less with potentially fewer benefits.

  124. the "lack of skilled employees" argument is crap by brillow · · Score: 2

    If companies had a hard time finding skilled employees you'd expect wages to be rising, and they aren't.

    What CEOs mean when they say this is "We can't find skilled, educated employees who will work for pennies."

  125. The five provinces of texas by mevets · · Score: 5, Funny

    Winchester, Browning, Smith & Wesson, Colt and Beretta...

    1. Re:The five provinces of texas by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      But... Beretta is in Italy. You probably meant Remington.

    2. Re:The five provinces of texas by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Winchester - Connecticut
      Browning - Utah
      S&W - Massachusetts
      Colt - Connecticut
      Beretta - Italy

    3. Re:The five provinces of texas by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I believe Colt was made in CT, and Beretta is Italian. I know Texas is big, but...

  126. Depends on who you work for, initially at least. by gelfling · · Score: 1

    If you work for IBM for instance your wages will never climb. They're on about year 13 of essentially no wage increases for 95% of the workforce. In the US, at least. But I would say it speaks to a different problem over all. Most employers want young people for about 3 years and then it's churn churn churn. For the employees out of school you have to make as much as you can as quickly as you can up to about age 30 or so. After that they plateau you whether you're good at your job, great at your job or terrible at your job. They just freeze you. You can stay and eventually make LESS than all the newcomers, become a management sociopath, or just quite. Employers don't care which of those three options you choose.

  127. Tech isn't IT by Ritchie70 · · Score: 1

    It's simple.

    Tech is an important part of driving the economy and building the future economy. But IT has nothing to do with that.

    IT is just the technology version of workplace facilities management. In other words, the janitors and carpenters. Need new cubicals assembled? Need the floors mopped? Need IDs provisioned or a new report about something? None of those folks are doing anything to drive the economy except in the same way as anyone else who gets paid to do a job.

    They're a cost of doing business. Nothing more.

    I used to work for technology companies, doing R&D for the products that the companies sold. Now I work in IT at a giant company that runs restaurants. The restaurant company is highly dependent on the technology, and there are some things they couldn't do without it, but nobody confuses IT with product R&D.

    There is a big difference.

    --
    The preferred solution is to not have a problem.
  128. Look up the word OUTSOURCING! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Your $39 per hour wage can easily pay for between 4-8 people in India or the Philippines.

    1. Re:Look up the word OUTSOURCING! by Ash-Fox · · Score: 1

      Yeah, but flying them over and putting them in hotels each time there is an issue would be annoying and take so long.

      --
      Change is certain; progress is not obligatory.
  129. Tech is no longer IT, IT has always been overhead by 109+97+116+116 · · Score: 1

    Tech is now i phones, i pads, BlackBerry, touchscreens, etc. and it's getting easier to offload IT tasks to managers and individuals instead of having in house helpdesk employees in high numbers.

    At least where I work, individuals are better at keeping their systems clean, avoiding the virii, worms, etc. than in the past. They can map their drives and printers themselves, and all in all are less of a pain than say five years ago.

    Most of our corporate IT is actually cross functional, doing CAD and CNC programming as well as IT work in our engineering department, or data entry and database administration along with network administration and system installs.

    IT has and always will be seen as overhead. Because it is.

  130. Re:Do you guys really make that much? by shutdown+-p+now · · Score: 1

    As far as verifying the claims goes, try Glassdoor. Of course, it's still a matter of trust, but it'd have to be a pretty huge conspiracy to skew the results there. In practice, comparing what I've seen there to anecdotal evidence from coworkers and friends in several big companies, it seems to be pretty accurate.

    It's hard to say what the best venue is for someone fresh out of college, but beyond that it's mostly networking. I found that LinkedIn helps a lot, too. And, of course, the good old fashioned writing letters to any prospective employers and asking if they have open positions. For big guys (which is where you usually want to be if you want a stable 6-figure salary), they generally have their own public listings online, where you can find something of interest and apply right away:

    http://www.amazon.com/gp/jobs
    http://www.apple.com/jobs/us/index.html
    http://www.google.com/about/jobs/
    https://careers.microsoft.com/search.aspx ...

    Cost of living in Puget Sound is relatively high, though probably not as high as SF, from what I've heard. I'm paying $1300 in rent for a 1-bedroom apartment in Redmond, but it's literally 10 minutes walking distance from my office, so they charge some premium for that. Also don't forget that there's no state income tax in WA, which comes up to a hefty difference at the end of the year.

    (By the way, Google also has an office in Kirkland, WA these days, and they seem to be growing it rapidly and are constantly seeking to hire more people.)

  131. Re:Do you guys really make that much? by jmcvetta · · Score: 1

    $40/hour for writing code? Seriously? Jesus. I'd do real work for that much. Unpleasant shit work. Cleaning monkey cages. Cleaning the inside of nuclear reactors. Now I think I understand why prices in the US are so absurdly high. You guys can afford to pay them. I make $10-$12/hour and that's when I'm lucky.

    So move to the Bay Area. If you're rather unlucky you'll make only $40/hr. I'm not saying that just for rhetorical effect - if you really are unhappy with your current compensation, sometimes it pays to move to a region with a stronger economy.

  132. Re:Do you guys really make that much? by jeff4747 · · Score: 0

    Yup. My social skills suck. No question about that. But I never even got an interview to prove how much my social skills sucked

    An interview is frequently not required to figure that out. I have not interviewed you. Yet I detected you have poor social skills.

    In the job environment, it can come across in the resume and cover letter.

    Because I didn't have the experience that was required by 100% of the ads I saw.

    Did you apply if you were close? The big dirty secret about job ads is we specify everything we'd like to have. Not everything we absolutely must have. Because 99% of the time, there's several not-very-related skills required to actually do the job. And we almost never find a candidate with all of the requirements.

    Employers take a candidates that have most of the requirements, and they'll have to pick up the other parts on the job. Just don't try to fake it during the interview - let them know you don't have a particular skill, and mention any skills you have that are somehow related and mention ways you have picked up skills you needed.

    Whether or not your particular skills are a problem depends on the applicant pool - if you have 30% of the skills and others have 80%, we'll take the 80. But if you have about the same or more than every other candidate, the employer may hire you.

  133. Re:Do you guys really make that much? by LDAPMAN · · Score: 1

    What the heck are you talking about? It's been my experience in over 25 years of hiring coders that the better ones tend to have engineering degrees. A CS degree is NOT needed to become a programmer

  134. Re:Do you guys really make that much? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I wouldn't write code for under $60, and I don't live in the Bay area either...

  135. More to the point... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Why would you expect your salary to not be flat?

    You have Skill X, which is worth price Y.
    Assuming the relevance of skill X doesn't change drastically, unemployment and cost of living don't change drastically, etc., neither will your salary.
    It doesn't mean your job isn't important, it just means you agreed on a salary for your work when they hired you.
    In general, the salary for a certain type of work (say, Oracle DBA) should remain relatively constant, going up with the cost of living mainly.
    Sometimes there are huge spikes due to a "hot trend" everyone wants to hire for and a labor shortage (like HTML in the 90s), but that's the exception, not the rule.

    Janitors are super important too, but their wage is relatively defined.

  136. If you are fighting fires, you are an idiot by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    There should be no shit hitting fans except the shit that you predicted would hit that fan. And after predicting it, you will have acted to mitigate the effect.

    Only bad IT people need the firefighting skills you are so excited about.

  137. Re:Quit complaining- staying even is good these da by ArsonSmith · · Score: 1

    The plans, drive and quality of those CxOs that are getting large amounts of compensation is why your pay is staying flat rather than you getting laid off.

    --
    Paying taxes to buy civilization is like paying a hooker to buy love.
  138. Which Sr Software Engineers are making $180k/year? by bessie · · Score: 2

    I live in San Francisco, and have for many years.

    I'm a Sr Software Engineer in enterprise Java development these days (been programming professionally for 30 years). Never wanted to get into management or team leadership, tried a bunch of startups that failed, and am not much of an entrepreneur, though I still love programming.

    So at 48 years old, I'm still a Sr Software Engineer, but my salary (or yearly based on hourly, since I'm contracting right now) ends up being about $145k w/bennies, MAYBE $155k without bennies (contracting used to pay up to double what salary could get, but no longer - it's barely more than salary now).

    Unless I were to head to a management track, or team leadership, or software architect roles, I'm pretty much stuck at this point. It's not horrible, not at all, but feels strange how one gets to a certain point in this field and wages just STOP, pretty much. The only people I know who have stayed in pure engineering who's salaries have gone higher (but who didn't strike it rich at a startup and aren't entrepreneurs) got there by taking a reasonably high wage at a big company, and going up through small yearly cost-of-living increases.

    For some reason, I thought - when starting this career - that my wages would just continue going up and up and up the more experience I got, but that ended up not being true after a certain point.

    Just giving my perspective anyway.

  139. Answer by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Very simple.
    Techies are both not rare and have no power.
    In case you missed it: High salary /always/ comes as a result of one of these two things: either you have a skill or competence that is so rare companies must pay lots to actually acquire you as employee, or you have a power position (typically a management position, apart from some backstabbing skills mostly no further competence required), and you get high salalry as a result of the consensus in such a power tree on dividing higher salaries amongst your peers.

  140. doctors, companies, a parallel by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    .. it amuses me that doctors are hugely compensated by everyone across the wealth spectrum, because it's pretty important to, you know, stay alive and healthy.

    Then you have the ludicrously wealthy corporations that throw out pennies to see which IT worker is desperate enough to pick them up... regardless of the fact that IT is the lifeblood of any corporation nowadays.

    There are numerous reasons for this, mostly I imagine for short term off-shore glory for the administration, before they bail and take their success story to the next bidder. Sometimes, it's an established wage structure where a higher income for fresh blood means raises for the aging straggler.

    The thing is, when the salaries start forcing their way up, the off-shore drums start beating and we're back to the status quo.

  141. Not in my world by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    In 2000, I was hired on to look after a 911 emergency call center. I had a BSc in CS, and an ASc in Electronics Engineering (with work experience in both). Rat bastards 'started me off' at $19 per hour. WTF! The boss was a micro-managing lazy-as-shit ass hole. I left after about 2 years. I knew the Ericsson Trunking radio systems, the SCADA systems, the Oracle databases, the GPS systems. There were only two of us, and I was the only UNIX guy. Ninteen Fucking bucks an hour. Untrained laborers get more.

  142. Re:Do you guys really make that much? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Not as much outsourcing these days? I want what you're smoking...or live where you do.

  143. Re:Do you guys really make that much? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You still see outsourcing because it's all about short term results, hey look I cut costs by 50% by offshoring! I'm awesome, now bye I'm getting scouted by another company that wants immediate results.

  144. It is the damn young people's fault. by bostonsysadmin · · Score: 1

    It is due to the fact that the IT world is mainly dominated by younger/newer employees. The entry level salaries in the IT world will probably stay flat for quite some time into the future and due to this and the fact that for most roles, companies would rather just higher a recent grad, the salaries for the IT world will always be highly weighted towards the entry level range.

  145. Re:Tech is no longer IT, IT has always been overhe by bostonsysadmin · · Score: 1

    IT has and always will be seen as overhead. Because it is.

    Unless you work for a company whose business is IT. Corporate IT is vastly different than say being a sysadmin for a SaaS company.

  146. Supply and demand in specific industries by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Depends on the industry you're in.

    I'm in pharma and I'm embarrassingly overpaid, specifically because of the specialised protocols/procedures/methods I know and the critical/sensitive nature of the work.

    I've managed to pay off 30% of my home bond within 10 months... (home bonds are typically paid over 20-25 years)

    1. Re:Supply and demand in specific industries by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ...sorry, forgot to mention, it's also highly fucking stressful and I've just about had my fill... just hanging in there until something better comes along (even if less pay)

  147. CA is a fairly broad, er long state by unixisc · · Score: 1

    CA != ("San Francisco County" AND "Santa Clara County" AND "Alameda County" AND "San Mateo County")

  148. Comment removed by account_deleted · · Score: 1

    Comment removed based on user account deletion

  149. Food by ecbpro · · Score: 1

    If food is so important, why are farmer wages flat?

    1. Re:Food by Ash-Fox · · Score: 1

      They aren't, they tend to vary greatly from year to year.

      --
      Change is certain; progress is not obligatory.
  150. reply by newnewshop · · Score: 1

    Having technology is the richness

  151. Re:Do you guys really make that much? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    $40/hour for writing code? Seriously? ...

    No - I make $105 per hour writing code. Seriously. But it's taken a lot of hard work to get there and I certainly didn't expect that straight out of college.

    It's all about becoming excellent at what you do, working hard, developing good people skills and trying to develop other skills such as project management, people management, etc. The more value you add the more valuable you are and your reputation is important when it comes to negotiating your contracts or salary increases whether you're a lone contractor or a salaried employee.

  152. Re:Do you guys really make that much? by Picardo85 · · Score: 1

    Ok, call this a random act of kindness if you like.
    I can't offer you a job in the electrical engineering sector but I am able to guide you in the right direction.
    The energy sector of Finland, if you are willing to move from the US, is booming. The two major clusters are in the Vaasa area and in the Helsinki area.
    Notable companies in these locations are Wärtsilä, ABB, Vacon, The Switch, Citec, and Vaasa Engineering group. Except these larger players we've got a totalt of around 100 companies active in the sector.
    A more comprehensive list is avaliable (focusing on the Vaasa region) here unfortunately in swedish since I couldn't find it in english.

  153. One reason and one reason alone by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Tech people have no negotiation skills. Period.

    The market is flooded with PhDs working for a dime a dozen. Business people think they can take advantage of us as a result, but what they don't know is that most of these PhDs can't write a single line of code to save their lives. Joke's on both us I guess. They screw us and we screw them right back :)

  154. Re:Do you guys really make that much? by Tough+Love · · Score: 1

    It's easy to buff your rep and experience as a software developer, just join any of a million open source project and contribute code that is awesome. Then you have something real to point to that will impress everybody. Libreoffice could use some more helping hands at the moment, for example.

    --
    When all you have is a hammer, every problem starts to look like a thumb.
  155. Re:Do you guys really make that much? by Tough+Love · · Score: 1

    Yah right, you better send that prof some hate mail, and get down to coding your AI on a GPU like everybody else.

    --
    When all you have is a hammer, every problem starts to look like a thumb.
  156. Re:Do you guys really make that much? by Eli+Gottlieb · · Score: 1

    Your problem is that you live in the Boston area, one of the sector-segregated, non-fluid labor markets in the country with a high cost of living to boot. Get the hell out of there.

  157. Re:If science is so important why are the wages fl by Eli+Gottlieb · · Score: 1

    Back in "the old days", wages rose throughout the entire economy in every growth period. It was normal.

  158. Hmm... by kenh · · Score: 1

    The unemployment rate for tech has been in the 3-4% range, but EPI says full employment has been historically around 2%."

    Hmmm, let's see if I can figure this out - unemployment in the IT industry is currently TWICE it's historical norm, and wages are flat... Could it be that old "supply and demand" thing where as supply increases, prices stagnate or drop?

    The value of a profession isn't established by comparing wages with other professions - besides, I'm pretty sure wages have been fairly flat/stagnant across the board for the last handful of years.

    --
    Ken
  159. Re:Do you guys really make that much? by 0111+1110 · · Score: 1

    Thanks. I really appreciate it. This story has gotten me really depressed. My whole life seems like such a waste. It's not just the money: the fact that I am poor by US standards. I think I would have been a much happier person writing code for a living even if I continued to only make 10k/year. A happy code monkey leaning back in the branches and chewing on delicious leaves.

    I thought I was being relatively practical studying Electrical Engineering especially compared to some people I knew, but I think I ultimately fell into the same trap as the anthropology major who believes they will be doing something other than waiting tables (or maybe teaching if they are lucky) or whatever when they get out of college.

    I guess it really is a whole new world nowadays, even with outsourcing. A system in which people are educated in university and then cannot find real jobs in their field when they graduate does not seem to be a sustainable one. Eventually those experienced developers will retire, but all of those inexperienced college graduates will have been waiting tables for the past decade or two when the industry finally has no choice but to accept people without relevant experience. I guess those companies that used to only take experienced applicants have finally seen the error of their ways. It's too late for me though.

    --
    Quite an experience to live in fear, isn't it? That's what it is to be a slave.
  160. Re:Do you guys really make that much? by spinozaq · · Score: 1

    I won't beat on you because I don't know exactly "how" you attempted to get a job in your field, or what your requirements were. Maybe you couldn't move very far or something. Let me continue my advice for others... and maybe, maybe you, if you're looking to start over again.

    I will say this. Getting a job is a very _human_ endeavor. I find a lot of younger technology oriented people, especially in technology fields, want to land a job the same way they get everything else. Online. This can work for someone with all the right experience, and just the "right" resume. sure it can. However, if you want to beat that guy with your lesser resume, you walk in the front door. You network with current employees. ( Use online information to find them. ) Build rappor. You call HR, you ask if there are any short term contract type positions available so you can see if the company would be a good fit for you. If they say no, or, we don't do that, you say, "Oh, you should ask your technology managers if they could use a program like that. You get a lot of value for your money, and it almost eliminates bad full time hires."

  161. Don't ignore the medical system! by Yogs · · Score: 1

    The executives and investors are good villains in the story because some are in fact, just that, and there's a broken phenomenon culturally based on a buddy system at the board level so that even those who don't act on craven impulses to cash in more still come in with a ridiculous compensation package and aren't exactly clambering for lower salaries (would you?).

    But another HUGE part of the problem in medium or even high skill white collar areas with flat or declining compensation is one of medical costs. Because employer premiums in employer group medical insurance plans is tax deductible, you don't see that part of your compensation on a regular paycheck, but it's usually quite large, and has always grown faster than inflation.

    We're up at 18.2% of gdp folks. Not all of that is in your group plan, some of it is medicare spiraling out of control, but no matter how you slice it, it's way more than any other first world country spends for better results. This entire sector of the economy is overpriced give or take 2X and it's making the rest of us a lot poorer.

  162. Re:Quit complaining- staying even is good these da by TheGoodNamesWereGone · · Score: 1

    Absolutely! I'd give a nut to have full-time work in IT making even $20/hr. I've been in the field since the mid-90s and can't find anything but temporary contract jobs, and those are few and far between.

  163. This is hardly unique. by BVis · · Score: 1

    A long time ago, those in charge realized that so long as every employer treated the people who do actual work like shit, they wouldn't quit to go somewhere else when you treated them like shit. The other guy treats his employees just as badly (or worse). Wages have been flat across all sectors for 40 years, while productivity has steadily improved. Executives buy million dollar vacation homes while the workers that make that possible struggle to pay for 2 bedroom homes in shitty neighborhoods. The truth is, that hard work doesn't get you anything other than more hard work. The trick is to make money off others' hard work.

    --
    Never underestimate the power of stupid people in large groups.
  164. It is supply and demand. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It does not matter how important you are. What matters is the supply of people who can do what you do. If the supply is there, the wages are not going to increase. If supply shrinks, then wages will go up. Econ 101.

  165. studied is flawed - my wages fell 300% in 10 years by jsepeta · · Score: 1

    network admins & server admins, beware: your skills are not valued by corporations

    --
    Remember kids, if you're not paying for the service, YOU ARE THE PRODUCT THAT IS BEING SOLD.
  166. $31-$39 an hour, HAH! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You got to be joking, in Southern VA, IT tech here, $15 a hour... :-(

    Working 5-10 hours OT a week, I'm lucky to pull in $35,000 a year. Last IT job before this one, in this area? $12 an hour....

    The area sucks so badly.

  167. Certification, certification, certification... by ElitistWhiner · · Score: 1

    Thank MS for giving industry affordable solutions to its problems guaranteeing wage-structured skills at an economy business likes

  168. Outsourcing by thoughtlover · · Score: 1

    Plain and simple. We're finally feeling the effects of balancing out the world's pool of available workers. India will probably host more IBM employees in 10 years than any other country and they're much cheaper to employ --which is based on their cost of living.

    IT isn't like manufacturing, though, so it's not like the manufacturing jobs that return to the US because Chinese wages and the cost of fuel rise (like GE finding they could produce a physical product here cheaper than China, now).

    --
    No sig for you! Come back one year!
  169. Re:Do you guys really make that much? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Wow, you poor sap. You're whole life seems to have been one big cop out.

  170. "It could always be worse!" by danaris · · Score: 1

    Compared to the insanity of Hong Kong, California isn't _that_ bad.

    Well, sure, there's always going to be somewhere that has it worse than you. But that doesn't mean that it's unfair of the vast majority of Americans to look askance at the cost of living in the Bay Area.

    Dan Aris

    --
    Fun. Free. Online. RPG. BattleMaster.
  171. Re:Which Sr Software Engineers are making $180k/ye by Stiletto · · Score: 1

    Unless I were to head to a management track, or team leadership, or software architect roles, I'm pretty much stuck at this point.

    I realized that and went back to school for an MBA. Even though I love engineering, now I grin and bear the business track, which, I assure you is more lucrative than being stuck in engineering. Yea, MBAs get a bad rap here on Slashdot, and yea, the coursework doesn't REALLY teach you much, but it's a credential that gets a little more than a second glance by business folks, and that's often enough to get your career back on an upward track.

  172. Re:Which Sr Software Engineers are making $180k/ye by bessie · · Score: 1

    Good advice - sadly, I was one of those self-taught computer teens; I took a programming job right out of highschool, went to college for a year after that, decided I didn't like college, and have been working ever since. I'd have to go back for both a BA and an MBA for that - 6 years at 48 is nothing to sneeze it. Hard to say it's worth it at this point (esp. since the biz side of things would indeed be - as you say - for me, something to 'grin and bear'). I can't say I did a lot of 'career planning' earlier on. :-)

  173. Only Applicable to First World nations by sethstorm · · Score: 1

    If you're a US citizen, they look for it.
    If you're from some hellhole of a country, they dont care - they just commit fraud to ensure that even a degreed US citizen with honors and qualifications will not get it.

    --
    Twitter supports and protects racists - by smearing their critics with the "Hate Speech" label.
    1. Re:Only Applicable to First World nations by mini+me · · Score: 1

      You are going to have to back that up. Certain industries certainly do. You are not going to be a doctor or lawyer without a degree. But where there is no government intervention, tech especially, such credentials are largely irrelevant.

    2. Re:Only Applicable to First World nations by im_thatoneguy · · Score: 1

      Don't bother. Sethstorm is clearly crap at whatever he does and thinks the reason he can't find a job in an industry with 98% employment is that an immigrant is stealing it from him.

  174. That is highly suspect given fraud incentives by sethstorm · · Score: 1

    Those foreigners are working off of desperation, which is a very poor demonstrator of value. That is the only thing that those foreigners possess that no US citizen will or should ever possess.

    In addition, you've been looking for the wrong citizens, or the process was designed to discourage qualified citizens from applying. So the claim that they're "better" is suspect given that it leaves out the incentive to discourage citizens from applying.

    If you have billions of people, they don't matter if they're not in the same regulatory domain (the US). The best you can claim is with criteria based on United States citizens - within the United States.

    The proper thing to do is to kill offshoring yesterday and perhaps bring it back when businesses like yours can't pull off fraud or needlessly avoid US citizens.

    --
    Twitter supports and protects racists - by smearing their critics with the "Hate Speech" label.
    1. Re:That is highly suspect given fraud incentives by im_thatoneguy · · Score: 1

      Those foreigners are working off of desperation, which is a very poor demonstrator of value. That is the only thing that those foreigners possess that no US citizen will or should ever possess.

      That's incredibly nationalist/racist and insulting to a lot of friends who possess talent not desperation.

      If we were all that dumb then we would have turned away Albert Einstein, John Muir, Igor Stravinsky etc.

  175. Tech (as IT) is NOT (that) important by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    IT and computers used as "IT" are in late adoption as a technology. They are a commodity. Cost reduction is the only value added, relatively speaking.

    It's the same any other other technology that is fully mature. Consider paper as a technology. Nobody makes a lot of money being involved in making paper or in using paper. Journalism and book writing is not a "money making profession" except for a tiny number of "super stars". For the average worker, it's a shit job. Same with IT now.

  176. What is a business? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Businesses are created to maximize profits for the shareholders/stockholders, who in turn reward the CEOs/upper level managers, not the actual workers who keep the business afloat.

     

  177. You can't pay people what they're worth by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    And still write the top 5 company executives a $40million bonus, while keeping another $20million each in reserve for executive golden parachutes if they run the company into the ground.

    There are far too many people with the "You're Lucky to Have a Job! What!?!? You Expect it to Pay you A Living?!?!?!"

  178. Because most IT workers are spineless dweebs by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You mod me troll. You should mod me terse and realize my point is valid.

  179. IT wages - seems apparent to me by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It seems apparent to me, why not everyone else?

    IT wages are not flat, you need to be your own IT business owner to not complain.

    Sincerely,
    Dumasses

  180. Guest Workers & Offshore labor by sethstorm · · Score: 1

    Not only do they get around the requirement for a degree, fraud is used for declaring that they have a degree or that they are qualified for the job.

    --
    Twitter supports and protects racists - by smearing their critics with the "Hate Speech" label.
  181. Yes, Capitalism by GPS+Pilot · · Score: 1

    Because of capitalism.

    Because of capitalism, if feel that I'm not being paid what I'm worth, I am free to market my services to competing employers. Try doing that in a command economy, where there are no competing employers because the State owns all means of production!

    there's almost always someone willing to do it for less.

    That works in our favor when it's time to, say, get a haircut. I'm better off when I go to the barber that charges $12, instead of the barber that charges $16. The one with the more competitive price gets rewarded with my business.

    Maybe you're not like me: do you seek out the most expensive barber you can find, because you feel sorry for the way the other barbers are undercutting him? Hmm, I didn't think so.

    --
    That that is is that that that that is not is not.
  182. Saving for retirement is "entitlement"???? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Shit, you merkins are madder than I thought.

  183. Re:Do you guys really make that much? by cyber-vandal · · Score: 1

    And you're making $10 an hour and think that efficient code is unnecessary. Pull the other one.

  184. Because of.. by mixmasta · · Score: 1

    1) Cloud hosting/SAAS/PAAS

    2) Outsourcing.

    --
    #6495ED - cornflower blue
  185. Not an asset but an expense by teknosapien · · Score: 1

    I think a lot of companies these days believe that IT/tech is overhead and not part of the core business. Part of that problem is most managers have no idea how it works, it just works. they toss money at a problem a result is produced. never understanding what went into making that result or what it takes to maintain it. they just know when they click they get

    --
    no matter how good it is, it is human nature always wants to make things better
  186. tech is fairly broad category. My long winded resp by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Spoken like a middle manager who has no idea how much their low quality IT is impacting performance of other workers or hindering their business. They think a professional is expensive, but they are shoveling money with no results.
    In car analogy, they would rather pay someone to take apart their car with a $200 set of craftsman tools and no experience, then take it to a mechanic who can do the same job at book rate in 1/4 to 1/10 of the time. They think it's a bargain because they are getting more hours, meanwhile less is getting done and it's getting done in the worst possible way.

    ===
    Perhaps the processes for training are the same our community as you have in yours.

    In the Montreal Quebec area of the country we have several colleges (CGEPS) and Universities (McGill, Concordia, UQUAM, Ecole Polytechnique, Univ of Sherbrooke and more. The introduction to CS are done via the CGEPS. Students come out with Java, C++, Networking (TCP/IP), C, GUI design, database (Postgresql or mysql) and Linux expertise.

    To graduate from CGEP or University, they must do a 16 week intern-ship in a software house. To graduate from a CS degree from University they must have first graduate from CGEP (4 semesters).

    The CGEP graduates here are very well skilled, They know subversion, git, and learn beyond fundamental algorithms. Some continue to University to complement their education with mathematics and CS engineering. (Bachelor Degree after 6 semesters of progressive work). For a subset of them, a masters degree in CS is their education path. And the demand for these new semi-experienced graduates is phenomenal.

    My own experience with two different CGEP level interns in successive years was amazing. I gave each a project that was matched to 16 weeks work. The intern had to create a power point presentation of his work, make a classroom presentation, had to demonstrate his working software to his professors and present grammatically technically complete well organized written documentation.

    In Quebec, the CGEPS and Universities are not-for-profits, meaning that the CGEP year would cost the student about $1500 per semester. The university is about $2000/semester for six progressive semesters.

    Want hardware design and interface or even kernel or device driver modules? Most of these graduates could do it. Is that the level of training of your entry level people?

  187. Apples and Oranges wrt immigration policy by sethstorm · · Score: 1

    Yet the people that you quote came in under much more "nationalist" and "draconian" immigration policy - back when they still had honest-to-goodness quotas and/or laws such as the Chinese Exclusion Act(up to 1943).

    I'm speaking some very painful truth - where desperation is what they have and what no US Citizen is to ever endure.

    --
    Twitter supports and protects racists - by smearing their critics with the "Hate Speech" label.
  188. Old Question by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    i bet serfs working the land under feudal lords asked a similar question about farming.