Salaries For Workers in Technology Roles, Including Software Engineers and Product Managers, Peak Around Age 45 (hired.com)

A report released on Thursday by the job marketplace Hired reveals that salaries for workers in technology roles, including software engineers, product managers, and data analysts, peak around age 45. After that, earnings level off or drop until retirement. According to the report, the average salary of US technology workers is about $135,000, with the highest pay in the San Francisco area.

Comments

For me the problem is real inflation

[rsilvergun]

vs statistical inflation. I find the cost of things I actually buy (food, shelter, transportation, my kid's college) goes up about 3.25-3.5% a year. The cost of things I don't really buy (vacations, electronics, cars in the $30k+ range, etc) go up 1.5-2.5%. There's a 'net' of about 2%. But I don't see that 2%, I see the 3.25-3.5%. Meanwhile my wages go up 2.5% a year if I'm very, very lucky. Most years it's 1.5-2%. And I'm doing better than most. Lots of folks I know haven't had a raise in years. For them the only way to get a raise is to get a new job.

I saw a story about a woman who started at K-Mart in 1974 making $3/hour. When the store closed this year and she was laid off she made $10.50/hr. Thing is, $3 in 1974 was just shy of $16/hr today. She'd lost 1/3 of her pay in 44 years. Us tech workers don't have it as bad, but we're still feeling it. Everybody's losing ground. You just kind of hope you make it until your kid's are on their own and that you die before the layoffs in your 60s come.

Re:$135000

[vux984]

"Cutting the military budget would be like cutting the cable bill when you can't afford the mortgage."

Sort of. If social security and medicare are your $2300 mortage, the military is your $600 car payment. Education is your $100 cable bill.

https://www.nationalpriorities...

Take a look at the 3rd chart.

The military budget is not as large as you might think, relatively.

I guess it depends "what you think", but no matter how you slice it it is still a massive amount of money; especially when put into perspective:

https://www.washingtonpost.com...

Even if we cut it in half the US still has vastly more invested than anywhere else in the world. (And if you look at that chart, of the next 14 after the US, most of them are pretty close allies too; so in terms of spending the US + allies still would drastically outclass all plausible opponents combined.)

Returning the mortgage analogy; my first home cost me $1200/mo in mortgage payments for a single bedroom+den apartment; and was probably among the least expensive places in the area; the loan payment of $600/month for a Porsche 911; on the other hand was an extravagance. Yeah the mortgage was the bigger expense, but it was still the car that was the extravagance.

If cash had been an issue at the time, I'd have traded down to a more sensible vehicle without a second thought... I'd have bought a $5000 used honda or VW, had no payment at all, and freed up 10s of thousands in cash in the process too depending exactly where along the loan it happened.

Likewise, the US military is a collection of exotic hyper-cars; it may not be the biggest piece of the total US budget but it is still a ludicrous extravagance. It's perfectly legitimate to argue that you improve the efficiency and reduce costs in social security and medicare, because you absolutely should do that. But refusing to even consider selling even one of your 918 Spyders or Rolls-Royces or Pagani's when cash is tight is a bit absurd.