Your mileage may vary, but as a professional of that standing, having invested substantial time and intellectual energy to master my profession, my social requirements, for my spouse, my children, my friends, where we go, what we do, are not going to be satisfactorily met by such an income level in New York City. This doesn't even have anything to do with personal preferences in such matters, but ultimately how one lives and provides for loved ones and the natural company one keeps.
Developers are not children. We are professionals and our profession is in fact one of the more highly demanding cognitive professions.
If MoMA or another non-profit offers you a salary than fails to support your lavish lifestyle: don't accept it. Hope that helps.
THIS is what we're discussing:
>> And that is more than livable, even in NYC.
> No, it's not.
(Aside here: you made a new account to argue against straw man arguments?)
Does the median houseold know and understand how to use the technologies listed, and do they have the necessary experience and competence to "implement" MoMA's "3-5 year strategic plan"?
What does the median household have to do with anything?
There is an objective measure of value provided and compensation received, for a professional of the required standing. MoMA is not a humanitarian charity who is doing good works for the "median household" (btw) rather an elite institution run by elites for "prestige" of the same elite. Not the "median household".
So given that the actual beneficiaries of MoMA (and its institutional social standing) are in fact not median households, I think you need to provide the "income" for that set, which I would think has many more digits than 70k.