Survey: 56 Percent of US Developers Expect To Become Millionaires
msmoriarty writes: "According to a recent survey of 1,000 U.S.-based software developers, 56 percent expect to become millionaires in their lifetime. 66 percent also said they expect to get raises in the next year, despite the current state of the economy. Note that some of the other findings of the study (scroll to bulleted list) seem overly positive: 84 percent said they believe they are paid what they're worth, 95 percent report they feel they are 'one of the most valued employees at their organization,' and 80 percent said that 'outsourcing has been a positive factor in the quality of work at their organization.'"
80 percent think outsourcing has been positive? They must not be working with the resources we do... They lie, lie and lie some more. Shirk responsibility and ignore questions.
I want the drugs those developers are on.
I think I have a good shot at becoming a millionaire in my lifetime - not from hitting it big, just from saving more than I spend (especially into my 401k, with company matching).
And what *about* the current state of the economy? It seems to me that it's mostly recovered at this point. And it's not unreasonable for white-collar workers to expect *some* kind of raise at least every couple years, even if it's just a raise on par with inflation.
It has an annual safe return of $40k to $50K. For younger developers who may not retire until 2050, that is not much after several decades of inflation.
In case y'all hadn't noticed, our community is rife with hazardously inflated egos. This is a natural extension thereof.
Obliteracy: Words with explosions
I've got a rather dumpy house in a nice urban neighborhood. It's paid for and worth a bit over $200,000. Looking at long term trends and the increasing popularity of urban living, it will most likely appreciate a fair amount before I retire.
That alone will get me a good chunk of the way towards being a millionaire in terms of net worth.
Now add in the gobs of money that they recommend you save for retirement and by the time you do retire... well, you've got a lot of money. This assumes of course that you can navigate yourself past the agism that's also part of being a developer and remain a well paid part of the workforce until you retire.
Being a millionaire not only means you acquire a million but also that you get to keep it. Essentially, it means you earn one million more than you need to live your life.
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
I am a software developer with 9+ years experience. I bought a house at the end of 2011 for $570K and zillow says it's worth $695K now. In 27 years, I think it's pretty likely I will be a millionaire due to inflation and paying off my house.
If you can't find a way to get to a million by retirement, something is wrong.
Here is a simple way to do it. Put $16,000 in your 401k and $5,000 in your IRA every year. Investing in a good S&P500 index fund which will return about 10%. In 18 years, you will be a millionaire.
Now getting to $10 million is tough.
>> 56 percent expect to become millionaires in their lifetime.
yeah and 99% of software engineers also seriously believe their initial time estimate to have that feature implemented by was actually realistic.
They must just be asking a lot of people who are understand math and have a little discipline. A carpenter can become a millionaire by retirement, all you have to do is start saving and keep saving.
I fully intend to be a millionaire by the time I retire, and with inflation that should be enough for a tent and some camping supplies.
"Never let your sense of morals prevent you from doing what is right" - Salvor Hardin
I remember when I was younger and management would send out employee opinion surveys. I'd answer them, be truthful and feel like my opinion actually mattered. I felt it was proper to express exactly how happy or unhappy I was and that the survey was some mechanism for improving things.
Then I became part of management and I realized how completely wrong I was.
The employee opinion survey mostly serves as a crutch for manager's to pat themselves on the back and the do a very good job curve fitting the results to their preconceived notions of how things are. It also serves to weed out people with bad attitudes - I've overheard more than one discussion of trying to locate an employee based on the comment they made on the survey.
So, if you say you're happy with the wage you're getting, you won't be getting a raise. In fact, it's even seen as a sign that pay cuts should be happening. Likewise, if you feel like you're a valued employee, good luck getting any more benefits. It's more likely management will use that as an excuse to strip away that one little perk, like free soda or something, just because they'll decrease the amount of HR budget dedicated to keeping employees happy. Don't ever be happy on paper.
Unfortunately, it's not enough for just you to express your desire for a raise. If 40% of your colleagues think they get paid enough, that's probably enough for management to little to no wage increase. You really want less than 5 - 10% say they're happy - in other words, 90% of the employees in your department need to express displeasure with their wages in order for the survey to have any meaningful effect on wages. (There's plenty of other ways to get a raise though - an employee survey is probably one of the least likely ways for it to happen.)
PS. If you think your company is one of those awesome companies that cares, you're probably wrong. If you sat in the room with the CEO, COO, and HR Director and heard that private conversation about the survey, you'd be horrified.
----- obSig
One could say the same thing about high school athletes expecting to go pro.
... that developers are no less short-sighted, ignorant, or stupid than the rest of the US population.
Mudge
In theory, theory and practice are the same.
In practice, they're not.
yeah, in 20 years, i suspect being a millionaire would be like what it is today to earn a "six-figure income" - which is B.F.D.
I remember when I was a kid in the 80's, a "six figure income" was meaningful. Now in some places where software development is a common trade (cough: silicon valley), six figures is just-getting-by
It looks like you skipped over the part, "that doesn't rely primarily on luck".
And that's hard?
As mentioned further below, saving ~$5000/year is possible - maybe throw away that $100/mo TV subscription or something.
Hell, my wife is in her mid 20's and I'm in my early 30's and we manage to squirrel away $28,000 every year on our two salaries (I'm a server admin, she's an engineer). If you're in the right industry and have a modicum of self-restraint it isn't too difficult to save.
The key is being in the right industry. The median income in the US is around $27,000/year. It is VERY difficult to save $28k if you are only making $27k. It seems to you like you have "self-restraint" because you still have money left over after paying for your necessities. Half the people in the country that make income make less per year than just a portion of your disposable income.
(and to the GP, you threw away that 100/mo TV subscription, that is only $1200 - where does the 5k come from?)
Enigma
Even outside of the valley in more normal priced places, if the first digit of that six figures is a '1', it's still solidly middle class, nothing more.
Gold is a good measure of inflation if you take the 10-year-average, or maybe the 20-year, of gold prices. While gold is hopelessly volatile in the short term, it seems to keep reasonably equivalent purchasing power century-by-century.
Home prices work out about the same, BTW. While real estate markets can be just as volatile, long term house prices are flat with inflation, which makes a lot of sense (the % of income people are willing/able to spend on housing won't change unless human nature changes, so you expect the average house to represent a given amount of purchasing power).
Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.
If you earn $80k+ a year, you need to be a double millionaire just in retirement savings to maintain your income when you retire. I guess this means 44% of developers don't expect to retire at age 65?
We are the 198 proof..
So, no different to the peculiarly American trait of considering poor people "temporarily embarrassed millionaires". No thanks to the self-serving ideology peddled by the rich, that we'd all be better off if we all worked harder, never mind the fact that the rich get rich by capturing the surplus value of your labour.
There's a degree of this everywhere (e.g. the hundreds of millions of retards out there who consider themselves "middle class", despite needing a paycheck each week/month to survive), but nowhere is this stronger, than in the US.
I'm tired of all this "six figures is just-getting-by" bullshit. I'm a software engineer in the valley who only a few years ago was making almost exactly six figures, and I was doing far, far better than just getting by.
I bought a house even before making $100k. It's a small house in a good part of San Jose. I probably would have had to get a roommate for the first few years had my then-girlfriend not been chipping in rent, but that's somewhat expected with a 30-year fixed-rate mortgage. My monthly payment will stay the same forever, and inflation and salaries, even for non-engineers, are generally only going up in the long run.
Even with the house payment, I've always been able to stuff a significant amount of money into my 401(k) and IRA. By starting early and investing in index funds, I'm going to easily have enough money in retirement.
Even after putting a lot of money into a house and retirement, there was still plenty of money leftover for fun stuff. I was able to go out to nice restaurants, I bought myself nice toys like laptops and bicycles, and I generally didn't have to worry about money.
Admittedly I don't have kids and wasn't trying to support a family by myself, but a second income would also balance that out.
Are you able to buy a 5 bedroom, 3,000 sq ft house in Palo Alto on $100k? Hell no, but you can still live an extremely nice life. It's an insult to the people living paycheck to paycheck to say that six figures is just getting by.