[IceMetalPunk]

Depends entirely on the specifics of the job and the location of dev. Salaries are often determined partially by the cost of living for the employee, which varies from one place to another. I know, for instance, that people on my team at work make more than me for the same job simply because they live in NYC, which has a higher cost of living than I do here in suburban south Florida.

My personal philosophy about money is often ridiculed, but the way I see it, if you have enough money to live happily and healthily (and support your family, if you have one), then you're being paid enough, and anything above that is just a bonus cherry on top. I know my salary is lower than some devs would ever accept, but I'm a single guy, so it's more than enough for me to pay my bills, have a house and food, and even some luxuries, and still save for emergencies and the future. Everything on top of that I donate to charity because others need that money far more than I do.

But as I said, it's a personal thing, and many people would call me crazy for it, so... it's up to you to decide what you think a fair payment is and then find an employer who's willing to negotiate a comparable salary with you.

[DeathArrow]

>many people would call me crazy for it

I wouldn't call you crazy. I think that settling for an amount that allows you to live the way you like and not asking for more is a sensible thing.

The only thing I am not ageeing with is being underpaid. If you can make 2x working full-time, why settle for x? It would be nicer to only work half the time and make x, if x is what you need. Time is at least as valuable as money, if not more.

[noname120]

Have you heard about the Earn To Give movement?

Plenty of people live under their means and dedicate their extra money to effective causes.

[IceMetalPunk]

I hadn't heard of it, but skimming some quick reading about it, yeah, I definitely agree with it. It also led me to the term "effective altruism", which is something I've been advocating for pretty much my whole life, never knowing there was a phrase defined by it. So that's neat. I'm curious to know how what proportion of people around the world follow these principles; I can't find any definitive or combined data on it, and I'm cynical enough to think it's not very high, just from my own experiences with other people in our hypercapitalistic, hyperindividualistic US society.

Funny enough, the Wikipedia article about Earn To Give mentions something that reminds me of my father. It says that David Brooks and John Humphrys have criticized the movement by claiming that once people start earning wealth, they will inevitably become less altruistic over time. My father always used to say, "When you're young, you're a liberal, because you have a heart; but when you're older, you're a conservative, because you have a brain". (That is, of course, not something he made up, but a parroted quote that's been said for many years.) And it always struck me as not only odd, but cruel, to draw a dichotomy between empathy and rationality, as though it's literally stupid to care about other people.

Anyway, thank you for letting me know about something new! :)

[nickff]

>"... as though it's literally stupid to care about other people."

That's not what the quote means. It's generally understood to describe how young people are well-intentioned but naive, and that you come to understand your limitations and get wiser as you get older, which causes you to adopt more philosophically conservative views (see Leo Strauss for a good example).

[IceMetalPunk]

Perhaps I exaggerated the dichotomy, but you just associated being well-intentioned with being naive, and being wiser -- explicitly in contrast to that younger state -- with being conservative. So even in your own comment, those associations are implied.

[nickff]

I didn’t say people who were well-intentioned were therefore naive, I said that young people tended to be both. Wisdom can be seen as understanding one’s limitations, as well as appreciating the insights of others (including one’s ancestors), and is more associated with conservativism.

I am not saying young people or leftists are dumb, or that right-wingers are smart.