Let the Other 95% of Great Programmers In

Re:Let the Other 95% of Great Programmers In by jonny_eh on Friday December 26, 2014 @07:39PM (#8801157)

> If you can't hire someone at your expected price then maybe you should raise it. Maybe the market price has gone higher than what you perceive it to be. That CEO could find his 30 "10x" engineers in a heartbeat if he offered 300-500k. Its not your god given right to be able to hire x number of employees for the price you hired your previous employees at.

It's a zero-sum game. If company X hires all 30 of the best engineers currently looking for a job, company Y cannot. Company Y can offer more in an attempt to lure them, but then Company X will be SOL.

We're talking about macro issues here. We want as many companies as possible to succeed.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Let the Other 95% of Great Programmers In by igonvalue on Friday December 26, 2014 @08:37PM (#8801294)

It's not a zero-sum game. Increased wages for engineers would encourage more people to become engineers.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Let the Other 95% of Great Programmers In by jeremyjh on Friday December 26, 2014 @08:47PM (#8801319)

Or to remain engineers, or to get BACK into engineering without taking a pay-cut. It would increase the supply of good engineers immediately. But I don't disagree with pg; I think we should hire all the greatest engineers in the world, except for the fact that we cannot identify them.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Let the Other 95% of Great Programmers In by tsotha on Sunday December 28, 2014 @03:18PM (#8807302)

This. Wall Street is full of near-geniuses who would be doing something more productive if finance companies weren't the ones offering the biggest salaries.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Let the Other 95% of Great Programmers In by brianchu on Friday December 26, 2014 @09:53PM (#8801489)

In the long run. IIRC labor supply is a lagging indicator, so in the short run (e.g. 1-2 years) it would be a bit closer to a zero-sum game.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Let the Other 95% of Great Programmers In by jonny_eh on Saturday December 27, 2014 @02:28PM (#8803625)

It feels like it's been zero-sum for a very long time.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Let the Other 95% of Great Programmers In by mgkimsal on Saturday December 27, 2014 @10:44AM (#8802834)

"It's a zero-sum game. If company X hires all 30 of the best engineers currently looking for a job, company Y cannot. Company Y can offer more in an attempt to lure them, but then Company X will be SOL."

So what? Why is that a problem that needs to be solved?

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Let the Other 95% of Great Programmers In by logfromblammo on Friday December 26, 2014 @08:44PM (#8801310)

I'd like to offer a minor correction. We want as many companies that provide positive value to the economy to succeed.

There is a positive (but not r=1) correlation to providing value to the economy and offering higher pay to employees. We (that is to say, software pros) don't want all companies to get as many software workers as they might want, because they wouldn't pay any one of us a decent middle-class wage.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Let the Other 95% of Great Programmers In by yellow_and_gray on Sunday December 28, 2014 @01:14AM (#8805493)

It's not a zero-sum game, and it's not about supply and demand. It's about growth, and hitting a limit on the total wealth generated.

I just explained this here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8805475

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Let the Other 95% of Great Programmers In by waps on Saturday December 27, 2014 @02:24PM (#8803614)

Does the economy exist for society or does society exist for the economy ?

> We're talking about macro issues here. We want as many companies as possible to succeed.

This is a "society exists for the economy" answer to the question. The whole point of the economy is to decide division of resources. If that means you don't get any as a CEO, well then you should just get the same treatment as a person entering your store without money.

Congress is not talking about increasing elite programmer visas (those visas exist, require extraordinary support for the visa, ie. extraordinary pay or extraordinary credentials, so these people are not a problem IF you're willing to pay). They're talking about letting the Indian "consulting"(what they call it)/slavery(what every sane person calls it) do double or triple the amount of work they do now. WIPRO will be the main beneficiary of this.

I find it kind of hard to believe that companies actually complain about this. But from a perspective of "more money for me (NOW), not for you" it makes sense.

From a perspective of maximizing our countries opportunities I would argue it does not (by itself) make sense.

[ Parent | on HN ]