There are several subtleties when comparing teacher’s pay. First it’s 10 months not twelve so you need to adjust for that.

Second the pay also usually includes retirement benefits that can pay you 100% off your salary after 30 years. This is hard to compare to private industry since 401ks have replaced pensions. This is probably worth 2-5m when mature, and is accounted for in their pay. I think this is the biggest issue, since private employers pay higher expecting you to invest in your retirement.

Benefits are also usually good with small if any employee contribution. Probably worth a few hundred dollars a month.

It’s almost impossible to lose your job teaching. It has a factor of security that does not exist in private industry.

Pay raises are automatic. Primarily it’s based on years of service and level of education.

I’ve run the numbers previously and it starts seeming fairer, but due to the retirement impact it makes buying a home in the Bay Area almost impossible.

The 10 month thing gets brought up in these discussions, but I'm looking at annual comp numbers, so the fact that it's 10 months makes the deal more attractive, not less.

Buying a home in the Bay Area is almost impossible. Full stop.

Would someone just starting their career in 2021 in the Chicago area get defined-benefit pension plans? Also, does a new teacher get as much as a new software developer? The $80k/year numbers that I keep seeing thrown around often apply to teachers with 20 or more years of experience, but software developers that level of experience make a lot more.

In my state, older teachers get these, but newer teachers including some of my friends have been cut out of them and need to invest in a 401k like other job. Their wages are also much lower, around 35k/year to start with, peanuts when you consider that they take work home every night and weekend (correcting homework and lesson planning are mostly done on their own time).

> teacher

> software developers

Those are very different jobs, with very different skill sets.

I'm not sure how much you can infer about one from the other.

Nothing, except that nobody reasonable believes that software developers are grossly underpaid.

> I'm not sure how much you can infer about one from the other.

You can certainly infer how much a largely capitalist society values each skill set at this point in time. The GP is claiming that "suburban Chicago teachers make as much as Chicago-area software developers do", presumably implying that capitalist society in the suburban Chicago area values the labor of teachers and software developers equally.

This is a claim that I want to understand better, since I don't think it reflects the statistical reality. Typically, such claims cherry-pick tenured teachers with 15+ years of experience, and compare their wage with the average software developer wage, which is itself a very unclear number – for example, a lot of developers go on to be managers in 15+ years whereas teachers largely remain teachers.

Glad to be wrong on this though, and might consider moving to an egalitarian society like suburban Chicago.

It has basically become a political talking point. My aunt is in rural Ohio making 80k per year as a HS history teacher. She is tenured but money wasn’t ever a struggle for her.