https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2018/11/study-over-20-years-silicon-valley-workers-median-wage-has-fallen-by-14/ Veena Dubal, a labor law professor at the University of California, Hastings, told Ars that a "seismic shift in the tech economy" is needed to make a real difference. "Monopoly-busting is key to this," she emailed. "Right now, a few companies—namely Google and Amazon—have an outsized ability to shape the economy. Their winner-take-all business models have reverberating effects across markets in Silicon Valley. If we want to fight inequality, we have to create more equitable markets. Antitrust laws need to be robustly enforced against these tech giants."
This smells like bullshit. The “study” is funded by the “UC Berkeley Labor Center” and it’s full of slickly-produced infographics and subjective statements about income equality. Zero academic rigor. I suspect this particular statistic is actually the CoL-adjusted wages. Which is more a reflection of the local residents’ refusal to build housing rather than anything the tech companies did wrong.
Thank you pomax for your enlightening comment. It’s hard to separate bs from fact and I’m glad we have an open forum to tell if it’s bs or not
I’m not sure assumptions about what the authors may have been talking about and criticizing graphics for looking good counts as “enlightening commentary.” Doesn’t seem hard to believe this could be the case since the biggest tech companies have been caught fixing labor supply markets (no poach / hire agreements) and are being sued for it.
Thanks h1b!
Yep government needs to break up some big tech companies. Before someone says FB, I think it's not easy to split, it's not a diversified business, so it should be heavily regulated like phone companies. This all why the anti trust laws were created in the first place. We have been here after every new tech boom: railroads, steel, discovery of petroleum. It's just history repeating itself.
Splitting Instagram, Facebook, and WhatsApp amongst separate companies sounds completely feasible without harming consumers.
@Pomax agree on that. They are separate networks so at least it's feasible. Although with big businesses having bought most politicians across both parties I don't expect any anti trust action against any company. Unless there is a political upheaval eg. Progressives taking control of Democratic Party at some point in the future.
We never learn from history, but we learn to bash current administrations of the times and ignore how we get there in the first place. That's what we get with crony capitalism (no, we don't really have free markets), and then newer workforce wants to equalize everything thinking that's the fix. Biggest challenge is slowing down money - finding its optimal velocity. Tax incentives here, tax-breaks there, given at city and state levels comes from local 'corruption' that's only afforded by national/federal backing. When did we last hear of Antitrust blocking a merger? Nothing in this millennium comes to mind.
Say no to more government regulations. I don’t want more government agencies squandering my tax dollars away.
UC Santa Cruz (the college without grades) publishes some communist shit and you believe it?
Other than Google on search, it's hard to argue any of the silicon valley companies are actual monopolies. Even those two would be a stretch given there is ample competition in ads business. Income inequality is real though, and the more protectionist the government tries to be (trump on coal and trade for instance) the worse its going to get. You absolutely need to get people to build more workforce skills and higher productivity jobs.
Wall Street seems to decide what's a monopoly and whose stocks should fly high like crazy. That should be reason enough for antitrust precautions to kick in. The government's responsibility is not just to prevent monopolies but also cartels.
20 years ago 100k was an impressive engineer salary. Now 750k is. Even COL adjusted, I call BS.
Not really in Bay Area. I remember in college in 2001 or so. New grads were getting top range of $90k-$100k from a few companies that no longer exist :-) Comparing those to today's top payer FANG. TC has gone up like 50-60%. COL is up many times. If someone has an idea of mid-level engineers at top paid places around the year 2000, that will be interesting.
They were the about 130k back then at L5 or L6, with the top end of the range going up to 170k on paper. So, inflation-adjusted salaries have really gone down. New grads started around 75k. Stock options for many got washed out too, or were worth about 50k-100k total. Those who made 100k back then are mostly near 200k now. Those who cracked the 300k are the ones who got promoted and moved around, but those still not high enough to move the averages. The numbers are skewed by post-2008 movers and they don't represent average. COL in Bay Area is mostly housing, which is driven by FANG. There isn't enough housing for people to buy, so the FANG demand meets the supply, rest are screwed with rents.
Tech Industry
Yesterday
675
The new Tesla Model 3 P goes from 0-60 in 2.9 seconds
Tech Industry
Yesterday
222
Why some people are more successful than the other?
Tech Industry
Yesterday
2289
ByteDance is officially fucked
India
Yesterday
580
How to save India from destruction?
Tech Industry
Yesterday
1930
TESLA UP 14% AFTER HOURS 🎉🎉🎉🎉
This makes it sound like it’s somehow the fault of tech companies when it’s almost entirely the fault of those that own real estate.
I think they're saying the fault is on the lack of regulation. Too much power is held by these large corporations and it's resulted in a concentration of wealth.