Hacker News Reader

Comment by lmarcos | Hacker News Reader

For a plain senior software engineer position (no matter if you have 8 years of experience or 20), I would say no. The glass ceiling is at around 80K for the vast majority of tech companies in Berlin and Germany (excluding the top 5% of companies).

But if you get into management, I think 100K is doable for a senior position. Other alternative is to be a Principal Engineer (or Head of Engineering).

View on HN

That's wild... As much as I love to complain about the bay area, being able to go upwards of $500k for an individual contributor keeps me here. Even taking into account of increased medical costs and crappy public transport, still very much worth it. Don't think there's any place it on Earth that pays this much

It's good to have a place like that. It's hard that it can take much more then you wish for, from not feeling productive all the way to taking all of the fun out of building. Watch out for that if you can. Also, Berlin is a pretty awesome place pushing some very cool things, both in and outside of venture tech.

But if you want or need 500k I’m guessing your list of potential companies to work for is small, and you’d have to work for a FAANG style co.

Not necessarily, the market is very competitive here. But to get to $500k TC as an IC (<= L5), your company will have to do well to increase the value of your grants by ~50-100%. But that is not uncommon or unrealistic.

"... upwards of $500k for an individual contributor ..."

Sucks that I suck.

Edit: Why are you down voting? I suck and will never make that sort of money.

What would be the job description/daily tasks of an individual contributor with such compensation?

Be able to code better than God.

Then give God's code a review.

I’m a senior engineer at a large Berlin company and I make 82k. We have a program to share salaries between employees internally, based on that and conversations with my lead I understand that I’m not at the top of the salary band. You can probably make 90k before you’d need a promotion to principal engineer or switch to management.

Our company is also not aiming to pay above average salaries, as explained company wide by people on a VP-level.

Context: 4 years of work experience.

This is wild to me. What makes a developer in Europe earn so much less?

It isn't less. The quality of life in Europe, the northern countries like Germany and the Netherlands, let alone Sweden, Norway is far higher than that in the US. This comes at a cost, but it is up to you to determine whether it is worth it.

Don't get me wrong, the US is great and there is probably a lot of room for nuance in what I am saying here and I am most likely wrong. So take this with a grain of salt:

Things that seem better in Europe (most developed countries in Europe at least): universal health care, better privacy protections, better political situation (seeing as the US is a flawed democracy [1]), and many other quality of life things [2].

You could argue that if you are rich, these things touch you way less in the US, which is true. But I also like not having to drive through poverty on my way to drop off my kids somewhere. I also enjoy knowing that where I live people don't end up in the streets due to getting some illness because of fictionally high health care costs.

1: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democracy_Index 2: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_Development_Index

Not to nitpick but even taking that democracy index at face value, the US is .05 from the same category as all those countries you mention. It's not nearly as stark a comparison as you seem to be implying.

As a European, I would say the US is very different from Europe. Yes, they are similar in economic terms, but the social attitudes, economic attitudes and worldview feel starkly different. Of course the US is big place, and this varies among states, but still.

That may be the case, but as a software dev in the US, you're actually the beneficiary (via your very high salary) of the dog-eat-dog market economics that dominate the US. Whereas in Europe, as a developer you're just expected to be content with a mediocre salary, like everybody else. The only escape out of it (in Europe) seems to be the contracting market for senior people, where the rates are on par with US non-FAANG salaries.

The difference here is that if you lose your job in European countries with great social security, you still have a salary you get by fine on.

And hospital stays do not bankrupt you, or even make a dent.

Even with «great» insurance in the US, there are all these edge cases and loopholes, stuff they will not cover.

Where I live I never have to worry about these things, I do not even have to put aside money for rainy days (though I do, just because I make more than I spend).

In Europe you get security + enough money to life comfortably, but not really enough to accumulate any capital and gain financial freedom. The system is constructed so that you give your whole life to it in return for the security and comfort. Whereas in US, you can save enough to escape the system before you're old. From what I'm reading, even just regular engineers (not software) in the US often retire at 55 or 58, as they have saved enough by then. Compare that to the retirement age of 65-69 through most of Western Europe.

> In Europe you get security + enough money to life comfortably, but not really enough to accumulate any capital and gain financial freedom

That's not true. I'm almost 40, and excluding pensions and capital tied up in my home, I currently have around £500,000 in savings. This wasn't particularly difficult to achieve on a software engineer salary in Scotland; we've travelled the globe for several years, have a nice house, 2 cars etc. We absolutely plan on retiring at around 50 at latest. Now with 20 years' experience I make €65k/y from my day job as a software architect/tech lead/lead dev (working 30h in a 4-day week). My wife and I also run a B2B micro-ISV that's made around €100k/y for the past few years (it was a slow climb to that figure over 10 years).

So, we have a household income of around €165k (~$200k) - certainly more than most in the UK, yet nowhere near what I could make in SV on my own - and still certainly enough money that we hardly need to think about it, and with considered financial planning we can easily retire early.

I'd far prefer to live in Europe than the US - I work way less hours, I get way more vacation days, our healthcare system won't bankrupt us (unfortunately I know firsthand it's far from perfect, but it's definitely still a boon for society), losing my job at any point in my career wouldn't have me out on the street, I don't need to especially fear the police, and (in general) people have a progressive attitude that serves to benefit all of society.

By your own statements isn't this an outlier? You're only in the position you're in because you own a business and have a pension where your employer is contributing 2/3 of the value. How much of that 500k EUR savings is from the business revenue?

Wouldn't it be a more appropriate comparison to look at someone with an "average" pension (whatever that may be for Scotland) and no business revenue?

> Wouldn't it be a more appropriate comparison to look at someone with an "average" pension

We're discussing salary of software engineers, firstly because this is HN, and secondly because software engineer salaries in the US are an outlier. Also as I mentioned in my original comment, the figures I gave don't include our pensions at all (as an aside, 55 is the earliest you can currently take anything from private penions in the UK), so I think the comparison is valid enough.

If my wife also had a job as a salaried software engineer, instead of working on our business, our combined income would likely be around €105k, which is still more than enough to be able to live very well and save a lot of money at the same time, as long as you are financially savvy.

Yes but your plans to retire at 50 are certainly taking your pension into account, no? Or could someone survive in Scotland on $500k? I'm not sure what the investment landscape is there but in the US $500k will only get you about $20k/yr on conservative withdrawal schedules.

Yes, the plan is to use that cash until we take pensions from 55 (or probably later if the gov moves the age forward); I meant the pensions weren't included in the €500k I quoted, which is a mix of cash, stocks, bonds and P2P lending.

I'm pushing 40, so there's another 10 years to build up the cash/stocks/bonds/lending pot further, and another 15 to build up the pensions further (well, hopefully of course). Might even choose to retire before 50, since I'll have enough that I'll have the option of trading off yearly withdrawals vs working longer.

I think my point still stands: software engineers in Europe earn less than those in SV (and it's important to remember than SV is an outlier even on the US), but you can still live a very comfortable life, save a lot, and retire early (even if not quite as early as 50), all while working far fewer hours and living in a society that provides free healthcare, education (including higher education in Scotland) and unemployment safety nets, and where society looks out for everyone, not just "number 1".

Edit: forgot to also say that the company pension has not always been as great it is now, and to also mention that 2/3 of our pension pot is actually in person pensions (SIPPs).

First, the issue is that you'd need to compare free healthcare in "Europe" (it varies quite a bit both in how free to how good, but ok), to what you can get on a $500k salary in the US. You don't compare the situation described, but something different.

Second, most developers don't run an independent ISV with their spouse ... If you did this in the US you'd have to further compare: $200k in .eu with healthcare with, say, $500k plus double that in business income, or $1.5m per year.

I think healthcare is going to be FAR better for you in the US. This won't be true for everyone, maybe won't even be true for most, but for you there can be little doubt.

I don't understand your 2nd paragraph - the business wouldn't magically make more money if it was based in the US (we sell globally, including the US).

Healthcare here in the UK is totally free. I know only too well (to my detriment) that it's far from perfect, but I still believe it's a wonderful thing for all of society. Plus nobody needs to worry about whether they can afford to call an ambulance, and nobody is going to be bankrupted if they have a hospital stay.

I wouldn't say healthcare in the UK is free, but rather it has a good balance.

If you have an accident or chronic illness, the system won't leave you alone. But they cover zero cost of prevention. E.g. regular check-ups, blood tests, therapies, unless you have noticeable symptoms are not covered, which is often too late to catch cancer, diabetes or cardiological illness at an early stage. My wife and I spend between £2000-3000 a year on these in various countries (to make it affordable). This number is not terrible, but far from free.

Your B2B makes most twice as much as your daily salary. Would it make sense to quit your day job and invest your time in the B2B?

It's not quite as easy a decision as it looks, as the job has a great pension (they put in 2x what I do), and the B2B is very reliant on a very small number of customers. But, still, yes - 2021 is finally going to be the year where I quit to focus on the business!

While that is true to an extent, I think you have to factor in (as far as quality of life goes) the amount of living people do in Europe before they retire. Many work only 37,5 hour weeks, and they have yearly five weeks paid holiday.

And statistics like millionaires per capita show that it is definitely possible to achieve financial freedom in Europe, too. Though US is ahead, except for Switzerland, of course.

I'm not sure if you take work/life balance into respect.

You can have all the money of the world, but if you're only enjoying it at >60 years it's too late.

Working for tech in the Bay Area you have a pretty reasonable and predictable path to financial independence in maybe a decade or so of work (so, early 30s if you start right after school). After which you can have any wlb you want for the rest of your life. You don't even have to work at absolute top companies like FAANG to achieve that, although it helps (FAANG & hitting L6+ you have a decent shot even at FatFIRE)

This is nearly impossible in Europe except by extreme luck. Enjoy your 40+ years of sub 40h/w work ahead of you with slightly longer vacations. While I can have a life long vacation after my 30s. Perhaps even spending it in Europe.

[ deleted my original reply - sorry I thought you were replying to another one of my posts ]

True, you probably work harder and are more stressed in the US, but at least you have an option to retire early there on your savings. In the EU, I suspect most developers have very little savings and plan to just work until old age and state pension kicks in.

Where I live, we are record savers ( Belgium). Everyone can go on pension at 56 ( much lower pension though) and can have a break for multiple years if they want, during their active career, that's not possible in the US.

I have 1 year to go for being debt free ( included buying a house) at 32 age.

I also thought it was US citizens that didn't save money?

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=https:/...

Even then, Europe catched up with productivity and some even doubled it vs. the US ( quoting : https://www.euractiv.com/section/innovation-industry/intervi... )

> Hours worked does not mean more productive.

I once got a contract offer from Belgium and checked your taxes. They are something like 55% for anything over 60k EUR per year? It means that, even if you get a high paying job, literally most of the money gets taken away. Seem rather hard to save significant amounts in such conditions.

Cost of living is lower?

600€/ month was enough to pay off my house loan. Leaves plenty of room to save money.

I literally save like 3-4/5ths, i do think that's more than average though.

Renting a place here would be 300-900€/month. I know someone who rents at 250€/month in the city with a decent house ( that's an edge case though)

Note: I'm paying off my loan early.

And there are places in the US where modest homes in good areas are $90-100k and will get you a similar payment even with less than 20% down. I'm not sure what your point is?

> In the EU, I suspect most developers have very little savings and plan to just work until old age and state pension kicks in.

This is also true of developers in the US. The number of lucky ones who can retire significantly early is a tiny fraction of the market — but companies have very successfully used those dreams to get lots of free overtime from people who didn’t notice where most of the money ends up. FAANG developers do well but even there early retirement is not a reliable plan.

That must be due to lifestyle inflation? If you don't save anything on a $100k+ salary, you have only yourself to blame (assuming the savings weren't wiped by medical bills or some other calamity). I suspect these people prioritize their McMansion, changing family cars every 3-5 years or funding fancy out-of-state schools for their children over freedom from work.

Have you looked at the cost if living in the Bay Area since 1990? $100k is not exactly buying you a high-end lifestyle involving private schools in a city where under something like $120k qualifies a family as low-income. Both parents in high-income jobs gets closer but then you’re talking about additional expenses like housecleaning, nannies, dining out, and probably multiple cars.

SF is an extreme but most of the high paying tech jobs cluster in areas which are closer to that cost of living - doing well, sure, but far from rich and definitely not able to count on being set for life since one illness, untimely layoff, etc. can easily derail a career.

That’s not to say that there aren’t ways to economize but there’s a long history of lazy editorializing about how kids these days are spending too much on avocado toast while studiously ignoring the data showing that the big problems are healthcare, housing, student loans, etc.

The Bay Area is an outlier as one of the most expensive locals in the world to live in. The median developer salary in the US is somewhere around $100-110k, and the vast majority of those people live outside of SF/NYC and work for boring companies doing boring forms-over-data work.

You can save a shitload of money in Iowa making $95k/yr.

I completely agree but how many jobs are there in Iowa paying that much? I'm sure there are some but it's hard to fault people for going where the jobs are.

My whole point is most jobs aren't in SF or NYC, and most software devs make six figures. Even if the high six-figure jobs are concentrated in those two locations (I'm sure they are, especially if you expand it to Austin, Chicago, and D.C.), there are going to be plenty of people making six figures in low COL areas. FAANG only accounts for a small percentage of dev jobs (a few tens of thousands at most, out of nearly 4 million devs in the US). Let's call it 100k to be super generous, and that they all make above the median. With 3.8 million devs, 1.9 make six figures. 1.8 non-FAANG. NY State has 220k developers so let's remove all of them for the sake of argument, even though that's going to include the guys in upstate in low COL, and double-count a bunch of FAANG folks. We're down to about 1.58 million non-FAANG, non-astronomical-COL living folks at least who are making six figures.

The BLS stats might be a good place to test those estimates:

https://www.bls.gov/oes/current/oes151251.htm#st

Again, note that I’m not saying you can’t make a good living elsewhere - having spent the first 15 years of my career doing that, it’d be odd - but that it’s not a simple ticket to being rich or even especially upper middle class. The pay scales definitely drag down, there are fewer jobs (and thus promotion opportunities), and they’re concentrated in the higher cost areas of low cost states.

Still solid, no question, but not a gold ticket. Note that many of the things the person I originally responded to are expenses which don’t scale down: if you live in a rural area your house is cheap but the two cars your family needs cost the same, computers and other consumer goods are only slightly less, etc. Those private schools are cheaper but not dramatically so, etc.

State pension won't be nearly enough to cover your living standards. You'd still pay insurance (less than before retirement though) and taxes off your pension. You still have to save on your own or go with an additional private pension scheme in Germany to somewhat be able to keep same living standards.

This is true, state pension is enough to survive, but not enough to live. You should absolutely put money into work/personal pensions while you are young.

As a person who travels (or use to??) yes it is.

Even the best parts of American (I owned a condo in Snowbird) are demonstrable worse than most of Northern Europe.

It is everything from the schools, food and health. America is still a place of personal reinvention but not of social capital. In Norway, every single person is a local currency millionaire. Every man,woman and child has wealth worth over USD 250,000 due to the Oil Fund.

Sweden has more billionaire per capita than America. The main difference is time. Time for life and time culture.

How does a Norwegian cash out their piece of the fund? Can you get a loan and use your fund allocation as collateral?

If not, it's not really their money.

How much are people worth in Sweden, Finland and Denmark?

None of those are useful to you when you are young and driven by ambitions.

These perks are nice when you are old or have a family.

That’s the whole point. I, as a young and healthy European, prefer to earn half or less than I would make in the USA, but live in a society where almost nobody is left behind. The benefits of living in a place where you earn enough to have a decent live even with the minimum wage, are above my personal profit to me.

I am a young not so healthy European and would very much prefer a better wage than these perks.

That’s a pretty sweeping dismissal: many millions of people need healthcare even when young, and it’s not having a family is something you start in your 50s. Having a more democratic political system is also important when you’re young since you’ll have many decades to live with the impact of decisions about things like climate change or racking up debt irresponsibly.

If one is ambitious I would advise to run away from Europe.

cap and cope

Employers pay half of social security, health insurance and stuff like that on top of the salary. The costs for a company to hire one employee for 60k gross is about 75k. US dollar does not equal Euro. 75k Euro is currently around 92k USD. The difference is not that big.

I'm not from US, but my understanding is that when people quote the US salary figure it also doesn't include all costs that employer has to hire an employee.

Correct. It costs's a lot to hire a new employee. I'd say for a small/medium size company hiring an engineer in the 100k-200k range, the cost of hiring is easily at least 6 months of that person's salary if not more.

That too, of course, but I didn't mean expenses like office space, training etc. but things like additional benefits/insurance that employer pays in addition to salary that can be considered part of compensation package but don't get paid to the employee.

Typically the employer cost in the US for an employee is between 1.5-3x their salary cost because the employer is paying things like health care and taxes.

Whoa, that's a huge range. Do you know what number is typical for (higher paid, 100K+) tech workers?

2x cost is typical, so if your salary is 80K then the employer is likely paying another 80k for things like social security and health insurance. Keep in mind that the employee will still have to pay quite a bit for health insurance, and that is largely driven by number of dependents (spouse and children).

> so if your salary is 80K then the employer is likely paying another 80k for things like social security and health insurance

Is that 80K gross salary? If it is, that would mean that the ratio of take_home_pay/total_cost_for_employer for US is smaller than in much of Europe (which is surprising to me).

Here is what numbers for that kind of salary would look like in Croatia:

Gross yearly salary: 80 000 USD

Total cost for employer: 93 200 USD

Take home pay: 48 088 USD

(Note - this puts you in the highest tax bracket, almost no one makes that much.)

I should point out that I'm considering the 2X to be the total operational costs to the employer for having an employee. In other words, if I am billing a client $X per hour then my expectation is that my salary will never be more than $X/2 per hour.

As kasey_junk points out, an employee will have federal income tax, social security and medicare payments as well as health insurance premiums removed from their paychecks. Some employers also offer additional insurance policies such as short term disability, long term disability, and life insurance. Those are optional and would be additional deductions from the employee's paycheck.

It really depends on a lot of tax factors & health insurance but in the US your take home on 80k would be higher than 48k. An example single person with no kids would have 12400 in federal income tax and 6k in social security/Medicare taxes. They’d also pay the employee portion of their health insurance premium which can be anything from 0 to a couple hundred per month but is paid pretax.

The highest federal tax rate in the US is 37% and that’s only taxed on income over 518k.

It's not just software developers, generally people don't make much more or much less money than one another. There are exceptions of course but in general the low level job earns you the min wage and as your career improves you earn 1.2X, 1.5X, 2X, 3X and if you are a big deal you may earn 4X-5X and that's it as employee.

It's not even about the taxes and I don't think it's about the supply and demand too. In Europe, including the UK, there are not many high growth VC funded companies, so most companies operate on thin margins and there's not much room to wiggle.

That said, even 200GBP/EUR increase on your salary usually goes long way.

It's just different. Why would developers in Europe make the same money as developers in China/US/Argentina? Different places, different salaries.

Personally I envy the high salaries in the US (for devs) but I wouldn't move to the US because in Europe I got 30 days of vacation plus public holidays (which makes around 45 days off per year... paid) working full-time (35 hours/week)... and anyway, if one wants to make serious money as a developer, the only way is to bootstrap your own SaSS; working for others (in Europe or in US) only gets you so far.

I find it really funny how often European and US developers are incredulous of each other's salaries :)

Supply and demand mostly. The EU means companies have access to vast pools of talent across the whole bloc and beyond. There are not as many huge purely tech companies like FAANG here.

"Supply and demand mostly. The EU means companies have access to vast pools of talent across the whole bloc and beyond."

I don't think that's it.

I was looking for work in Europe 20 years ago, and they had very few tech people there back then compared to the US, and were desperate to import talent from other countries. However, their salaries were still very low compared to the US.

I would seem they weren't desperate enough, would it not?

From Wikipedia [0]: A demand schedule [...] represents the amount of a certain good that buyers are willing and able to purchase at various prices.

That demand is large at low salaries but low at higher salaries just means that demand isn't very high (or as high as it is in US).

[0] - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Supply_and_demand

Maybe so, but 20 years ago it wasn't a case of having "vast talent pools" in the EU, as they just didn't exist.

Also, there are limits to what companies can afford to pay while still having a viable business model. They can be maximally desperate for talent, but still limited to paying only up to a certain amount.

> Also, there are limits to what companies can afford to pay while still having a viable business model. They can be maximally desperate for talent, but still limited to paying only up to a certain amount.

That's part of the demand curve, as commonly understood in economics, even if we might colloquially say that "there is a large demand".

If there was high demand then we would see salaries rise quickly year over year.

I have the same question about Canada.

Canada is even more puzzling. You can cross the border from Vancouver to Seattle and triple your salary, pay less in income taxes, and live in a city with less rent.

All over less than 100 miles.

I suppose that people really value being in Canada.

Some of us do, but I think majority would hop on an airplane at a drop of a hat. Indeed, if it weren't for pandemic I myself would be looking to move to the US.

Staying in Canada is very hard to justify for a software dev.

How much of the Canadian salary is taken in taxes?

For me (in BC), around 25-30% and I'm slightly below 100k. The deduction is usually a little more than if you use those online tax calculators.

For me ends up being 28%-ish percent if my math is correct. Ether way 25-30% is a good ballpark

It is weird, right? Same time zone as the US, so you can't use the argument "Europe has easier access to eastern European / Indian developers in the proper time zone"...

I don't think this happens across all trades either. Last I looked, a mechanic would make similar money in either country.

For some reason Japan pays software developers peanuts as well, which I don't get since some of my favorite software comes from Japan (Nintendo, FromSoftware, Square Enix, Sony)

It's the US and specifically the Bay Area that's the outlier here. Because it has a few hugely rich tech companies and is pumped full of VC cash.

Supply and demand I would venture.

High taxes, but on the other hand you receive: a top-notch public healthcare, arguably one of the best standards of living in the world (good ratio of earnings vs. expenses, strong labor law, relatively affordable rental prices).

> High taxes

This can't be the answer since we're talking about pre-tax salaries. On the other hand, higher taxes just mean that the difference in post-tax salaries between Europe and the US is even bigger than it seems initially.

At least in Germany the employers pay about half of mandatory social insurances such as healthcare, unemployment, pension etc.

This is usually not considered when people talk about pre-tax salaries. Ultimately though that’s just accounting, really that is part of the money you earn.

> This is usually not considered when people talk about pre-tax salaries.

The same is true for US (I think - maybe someone from there can correct me if it's wrong).

I've lived in Italy, Germany, and the US, and I would argue that tech workers recieve all 3 of those things in the US as well. Unless you are saying everyone gets those 3 things in EU and not just middle class and up.

What's notable about the EU is that everyone gets those benefits whereas in the US only upper class has that.

Right, so perhaps one hypothesis is that EU tech salaries are so much lower than US because EU tech salaries have to subsidize lower class much more than US salaries.

Even still though, pre-tax EU salaries seem really low compared to pre-tax US salaries

Regarding your first point, I don't really see it that way since the total value of EU tech salaries is probably a drop in the bucket compared to all other industries.

I'd much rather be in the EU making EU wages than in the US making US wages. Europeans working in the US may not be in the same risk category as US Citizens (in the US) as they can always move back to EU if they face a health crisis.

The quality of US healthcare is better for the average person and the waiting lists are much lower or do not exist. Many from my country will travel to the US for healthcare and paid. So many advancements only become available 10 years later. Free health is never unlimited you always have to make tradeoffs.

Where in Europe? Europe (nor EU) doesn't universally have top-notch public healthcare or best standard of living.

Indeed, a lot of European nations have good healthcare coverage (i.e. doesn't cost much), but poor overall healthcare (low quality doctors, high waiting times, poor access to specialization). Some nations in EU are even developing nations with massive ghettos and extreme poverty the severity of which doesn't even come close to the worst states like Mississippi. I would guess mainly just the blue banana[0] of EU and the nordic countries have the highest quality of life since they have access to the most wealth.

[0] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blue_Banana

That's not true, EU healthcare is excellent.

But if you have all the money of the world, you could get an extra bit in the US for some health issues. In most cases, it's not worth the cost.

Even then, some Arab sjeiks regularily travel to europe for advanced surgery. So I think that would contradict the first statement.

Eg. The severely sick sultan of Omar last year in Belgium with a 1700 person delegation.

6 covid vaccines have some dependency on Belgium. The Pfizer one was shipped from Belgium to the US.

Right, I'm not questioning the quality of blue banana or nordic country healthcare. But... are you willing to vouch for the quality of healthcare in Spain or Italy, or some of the eastern EU countries like Romania? Because I lived in Naples and Rome for a combined 5 years and I was not impressed with the quality of healthcare I received compared to what I'm used to in America (for one, doctors don't usually come in with lit cigarettes in america, though I'm told "that's a Naples thing").

Are you willing to vouch for healthcare in Alabama?

Almost every person making decent money I know pays for private healthcare and avoids the government-run system whenever possible [0]. No lines and much better service. When someone gets a very rare disease, people often need to fundraise millions to go to the US. Many kinds of treatments simply aren't available.

[0] for big ticket stuff there's usually no private alternative, if you're dying from cancer you'll probably have to go to a government facility and hope for the best

Legitimate question: are the differences in standard of living something you could buy somewhere else if you had 2x or 3x the total income? Or is it more intangible?

Lol worth 100k?

Yes. Nobody in Europe can even believe that things like ambulance rides could be anything but free. Those stories sound like depressing dystopia from a post-apocalyptic sci-fi movie.

The swiss right in the center of europe can very well imagine

https://www.srf.ch/news/schweiz/2500-franken-fuer-62-kilomet...

For nearly all US tech. workers an ambulance ride will be free or a nominal deductible.

Wait, what? No. That is definitely not true. We have very good insurance, and every ambulance ride has cost a fortune.

You have insurance where an ambulance ride doesn’t just apply to your deductible?

I believe it but have never had an insurance plan like that.

I've had insurance from Arbor (Blue Cross) pre-ACA, from Erin's job at the Latin School (Blue Cross) pre-ACA, from Matasano (United), from BCBS on the ACA marketplace (and now at Fly, but that doesn't matter b/c...) and ambulance trips in all 4 of those, and all of them cost a fortune.

Later

Erin also points out that beyond the deductible cost, your ambulance has to be in-network, or it's not covered at all --- that bit our family too.

I'm a defender of our insurance system, weird as that sounds, but even I won't try to stick up for how we handle ambulances.

The ambulance rates where I live (Vancouver, BC, Canada) always make me blink:

Insured: $50 flat rate, ground or air.

Uninsured:

$848 flat fee (ground service)

$4,394 per hour (helicopter)

http://www.bcehs.ca/about/billing/fees

If you think only about yourself, of course not. If you think about your family, like your children and grandchildren that may not work in IT or a similar well paying industry, then it starts to become worth it. You know they will have an acceptable quality of life whatever happens. Years after your death.

Of course you can work a few years in California and move back to Europe. It takes some courage and a lot of people prefer to not move abroad.

But... why are you excluding the top 5% of companies? That seems like it's precisely the answer to this question, there are several large companies with engineers in Berlin that pay in this range. levels.fyi shows numerous data points of L5 engineers at Amazon's Berlin office getting ~€110,000 for example.

I would guess that GP doesn't feel qualified... Earning a shitload of money once you've joined FAANG is the easy part, hard part is getting hired by FAANG in the first place.

I guess it's because not everybody can work at the top 5% of companies. Not only because the entry level is higher than on average companies... it's also a question of physics: the top 5% of companies cannot hire 100% of the pool of developers.

So, the vast majority of developers out there (including HN) will never work for a top 5% company.

Also reflects my experience. There are big companies in Germany where you can basically stay forever and auto-progress into the ~100k range even as a "plain" software engineer. However while still holding this title you will have more tasks that require leadership.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com