[uzakov]

To add to this comment(might be biased as I live and work in the UK): salaries here are just not on the USA level, while costs of items are the same, if not higher(check Apple products price difference on the official website, clothing etc). For many of high demand engineers the choice is London/Manchester or move to the USA

[chrisseaton]

Like most tech people I know in the UK, I've worked for North American companies my whole career. I'd love to work for a UK company and support investment in the UK more, but the pay and working conditions just aren't even remotely competitive (how crazy does that sound, saying I have to go to North American companies to get better working conditions but it's true.) Thankfully more and more let you work remotely from the UK now.

I might be misremembering and exaggerating but I think I looked at ARM internships a decade ago and they were paying about the same daily rate as the hourly rate I got from an American company. Guess where people went?

[reader_mode]

> I'd love to work for a UK company and support investment in the UK more, but the pay and working conditions just aren't competitive (how crazy does that sound, saying I have to go to North American companies to get better working conditions but it's true.)

Why is that crazy ? From what I've seen the standard of living in the US is actually really good if you're a skilled professional in a high demand field and the labor market is more competitive - better than the EU IMO.

Which is why I'm not sure why I see so much US negative comments around here and this smug EU stance - like just recently I heard from two former coworkers that got a job at similar role/experience level one in Munich and one in Chicago - the guy that went to Chicago got 60% higher salary and his cost of living is roughly similar (didn't go in details TBH).

Also on a personal and cultural level I prefer working with Americans - with Europeans there's so much posturing and pretending to be professional and formal (with skills usually lacking).

[chrisseaton]

> Why is that crazy ?

Because people think the big benefit of being at a European company that balances the worse pay is more vacation, more reasonable working hours, better work-life balance, working autonomy.

But that's not true. It's the opposite.

I get far better vacation, working hours, work-life balance, working autonomy at North American companies. And better pay. So what's the benefit of working for a European company?

[reallydontask]

Do you work in the US or UK?

I read your original post as working in the UK for an American company, but now I'm not so sure

[andor]

How much vacation did you take last year?

What are your working hours?

[Avamander]

> Which is why I'm not sure why I see so much US negative comments around here and this smug EU stance

Because not only the (relatively) rich matter.

[reader_mode]

Sure but the US has plenty of advantages over EU and EU is quite bad in some regards as well (especially with regards to equality across the EU - US is usually grouped together but people seem to be talking west Europe and Scandinavian countries when discussing EU, meanwhile I just saw a report how in eastern Europe women are doing surrogate pregnancies as a paid gig because of their living conditions ... if you travel through parts of EU like Bulgaria you'll quickly encounter some medieval living conditions)

[vr46]

Romania is pretty bad too, but the whole point is joining the EU is to help IMPROVE all this, which it does. I have driven across the EU and the US and at the lower socioeconomic end, neither has much difference, except that the EU is committed to improving the lives of its citizens (as far as I have seen) through investment and legislation, and the US isn’t. Quite the opposite.

[DanBC]

> meanwhile I just saw a report how in eastern Europe women are doing surrogate pregnancies as a paid gig because of their living conditions

I agree that EU vs US discussions can be tedious, but surrogate pregnancies for cash happen in some US states too.

https://www.statnews.com/2020/02/12/paying-gestational-carri...

[reader_mode]

It's not the fact that it can happen but that there are agencies and it's a growing business in the region shows you how bad it is

[ChuckNorris89]

>how crazy does that sound, saying I have to go to North American companies to get better working conditions but it's true

Same for my time in Germany. I got way better working conditions(not talking about money) working for US companies who had offices there than for German ones.

[x87678r]

If you're a high demand engineer, you're probably right but SV is special. If you compare London to NY or Birmingham to Altlanta the gap isn't really there. Esp check taxes and healthcare in the US. I've worked both and I'm living in NY based on what I saved when I worked in London, money wise the USA has been surprisingly bad.

[TwiztidK]

You sure? I just did a quick search for EE salaries in London[1] compared to Detroit[2] (the closest large city to me) and Detroit comes out ahead by a lot. And I'm sure rent is cheaper.

However, I agree that salaries are ridiculous in some cities. I'd love to give living in NYC or LA a shot, but the salaries I see for EE jobs are marginally more than what I make in the middle of nowhere.

1: https://www.indeed.co.uk/salaries/senior-electrical-engineer... 2: https://www.indeed.com/career/engineer/salaries/Detroit--MI

[x87678r]

You're right. Detroit is higher than I expected. I guess low GBP rates make a difference, when I was in London 1 GBP = 2 USD. (Rent in London is definitely not cheaper.) London isn't a great place for EE. Software in Banks had/has crazy demand.

[uzakov]

1) You are comparing London, the largest city and the capital of the UK, to Detroit, which is not the capital nor the largest city.

2) Check out numbeo https://www.numbeo.com/cost-of-living/

[TwiztidK]

That was the point. Despite London being a much larger population center with much higher cost of living, engineers are still paid more in Detroit.

[ChuckNorris89]

LOL, that's rich, engineers in the UK feeling underpaid when you have the best market for SW engineers in Europe(London).

Wanna see underpaid? Come to Austria.

[uzakov]

I haven't been to Austria but numbeo seems to suggest what you say is incorrect on majority if not most of parameters https://www.numbeo.com/cost-of-living/compare_cities.jsp?cou...

[ChuckNorris89]

Income levels wise, Numbeo is just a mish-mash full of noise and can't be taken seriously to judge salaries of skilled professionals(that's what we're talking about right?)

Sure, poor people have it better in Vienna because it's cheaper and has better social services than London but skilled professionals(developers and engineers) have it worse as underpaying is rampant in the tech industry there.

Sources: me living there and my friends living in the UK

[uzakov]

Do your friends on the similar level save more per month after all bills and taxes than you? Genuine question

PS will they be saving more in the situation where both of you had promotions?

[uzakov]

Since parent comment was deleted here is my answer anyway:

I would say from personal experience, contractor earning 600 quid/day in London is more of an outlier than the norm, unless he is more like Principle level and working for FAANG type companies.

Your answer answers a question similar to mine but not quite what I was asking.

You take people A and B, person A lives in London, rents studio in the city centre, works as mid level engineer in a regular bank. Person B lives in Austria, rents studio in the city centre, works as mid level engineer in a regular banks. Who will have more money left after bills, food, taxes etc? Numbeo suggests that what you said is incorrect, as I pointed above but you might absolutely be right as well.

"Compare that to the likes of Monzo and Austria is at least 15 years behind." Many Monzo features(for example instant notifications when card is used) are not present in many, if not majority of UK banks.

[rapsey]

What about health care costs. Education costs. Amount of vacation time. Pension.

[uzakov]

Not sure if your comment is asking about those things or implying that what I said is incorrect.

Healthcare costs: I personally do not have experience with USA healthcare system. In terms of UK healthcare system I have mixed feelings: key reasons(short list):

1) While it's free, getting many basic things(like blood, urine tests, ultrasound scan) is complicated if you have no symptoms. It's much cheaper and better for the health to treat things at the earliest stage possible and it's not always easy to do so in the UK, even with some private health insurance.

2) Relatively long waiting times for procedures, A&E[1] etc

3) Biased(and potentially selfish) reason: healthcare costs need to be looked both in terms of general population and personal level. If you are healthy and young your chances of using healthcare services are lower.

Education: can't comment as haven't studied in the USA and people from outside of the UK(me) had to pay tuition fees in the UK

Vacation(I might be wrong on this one): from my understanding speaking to some tech working from the USA, amount of days is only 5-10 days lower than than of the UK for many tech companies.

Above does not mean UK is better or worse than USA, I love it here, I love British countryside,it is majestic! [1] https://www.nhs.uk/using-the-nhs/nhs-services/urgent-and-eme.... [EDIT] First sentence replaced "what I wrong is incorrect" with "what I said is incorrect" and added some commas

[DanBC]

> While it's free, getting many basic things(like blood, urine tests, ultrasound scan) is complicated if you have no symptoms.

I feel like you've misunderstood this.

If you don't have symptoms but are asking for testing then you're asking for screening. We have strict criteria for screening because it has potential to cause harm.

https://www.gov.uk/topic/population-screening-programmes/pop...

Here's a blog that explains why testing people who don't have symptoms causes more false positives. https://www.jackiecassell.com/moonshot-moonshine-and-false-p...

> It's much cheaper and better for the health to treat things at the earliest stage possible

This is often incorrect.

[uzakov]

>I feel like you've misunderstood this.

>If you don't have symptoms but are asking for testing then you're asking for screening. We have strict criteria for screening because it has potential to cause harm.

Blood/urine test =/= testing. Also from the link you provided: "Screening is the process of identifying individuals who may be at higher risk of a disease or condition amongst large populations of healthy people." People who are not at risk might want to do blood/urine test to check if they currently have underlying issues.

> Here's a blog that explains why testing people who don't have symptoms causes more false positives.

The link you provided talks about Covid19 situation, don't think that was part of the discussion.

>> It's much cheaper and better for the health to treat things at the earliest stage possible

>This is often incorrect.

Last time I checked that was the thing suggested, can you please clarify and elaborate why you say so?

[DanBC]

> Blood/urine test =/= testing. Also from the link you provided: "Screening is the process of identifying individuals who may be at higher risk of a disease or condition amongst large populations of healthy people." People who are not at risk might want to do blood/urine test to check if they currently have underlying issues.

This sentence doesn't make much sense.

> Blood/urine test =/= testing.

If the patient has symptoms then it's a test. If the patient does not have symptoms then it's screening.

> People who are not at risk might want to do blood/urine test to check if they currently have underlying issues.

But this is screening, and screening is often harmful, which is why it's strictly controlled.

The blog is not only about covid-19, it uses Covid-19 testing as an example. But the information about screening, especially false positives, applies to the type of blood testing you're talking about.

If you want a different blog: https://understandinguncertainty.org/node/1279

> Last time I checked that was the thing suggested, can you please clarify and elaborate why you say so?

The problem is of "over testing", "over diagnosis", and "over treatment". https://ebm.bmj.com/content/23/1/1

Your claim is that early detection means that treatment can start earlier, and that this reduces side effects and prolongs life.

My claim is that often screening sometimes does not prolong life, and sometimes causes harm.

https://www.hardingcenter.de/en/early-detection-prostate-can...

Take 1000 men aged 50. Give them yearly screening for prostate cancer. Take another group of 1000 men and don't give them prostate cancer screening.

In both groups about 7 men will die from prostate cancer, and about 210 men will die from any cause. But in the screening group 160 men will have a false alarm and needless biopsy, and 20 will have needless treatment. (And the treatment for prostate cancer can leave people incontinent or impotent).

See also this for a discussion of 5 year survival rates and why they're problematic: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=24022426

[uzakov]

Interesting links! Thanks for sharing

[pkaye]

I was trying to search online to compare student debt in UK vs US. Any idea why the below link shows a high student debt in England?

From https://www.statista.com/statistics/376423/uk-student-loan-d...

> In 2020, students graduating from English universities will have incurred an average of 40.28 thousand British pounds of student loan debt...

From https://studentloanhero.com/student-loan-debt-statistics/

> It’s 2020, and Americans are more burdened by student loan debt than ever.

Among the Class of 2019, 69% of college students took out student loans, and they graduated with an average debt of $29,900, including both private and federal debt. Meanwhile, 14% of their parents took out an average of $37,200 in federal parent PLUS loans.

[uzakov]

Can't comment about Wales and Norther Ireland but can make an educated guess about England and Scotland.

University cost of English unis are higher than of Scottish unis. Eg please see Edinburgh university link https://www.ed.ac.uk/tuition-fees/find/undergraduate/2020-20.... For "Artificial Intelligence and Computer Science (BSc Hons)" the cost for Scottish students is £1,820, where for Home - RUK its £9,250. I would assume that many Scottish families can cover the £1,820 cost, where £9,250 is more difficult to cover for more families

[bserge]

That's the thing, for a high skilled position, the American salary will more than cover all of that.

[tick_tock_tick]

With access to a high paying job, like software engineering, all of those are better in the USA.