> In most places in Europe, even $100k is considered a high salary
I think it's worth adding here that US developers can have a much higher burden for things like health insurance. My child broke his arm this year, and we hit our very high deductible.
I would like to see numbers factoring in things like public transportation, health insurance, etc., because I personally feel like EU vs US developers are a lot closer in quality of life after all the deductions.
It’s not really about the numbers. My pile of money at retirement would definitely be larger if I moved across the pond. But here my children walk themselves to school from the age of six. I don’t worry about them getting killed by a madman. And even the homeless get healthcare, including functional mental health support. Things no employer can offer in the US.
This a very reasonable viewpoint. As a different personal opinion, I am glad that I live on my side of the pond.
I am in my early 50s, and having worked in tech for the last 24 (with sane hours and never at the FAANG salaries) I own my condo in a nice town, my kids college is paid for and my personal accounts are well into 7-digits.
This is not all roses: schools in the US stink (I have grown up on the other side of the pond and was lucky to get a great science education in school so I can see the difference), politics are polarized, supermarket produce is mediocre, etc.
The biggest issue for me though is that I suspect that the societies on both sides of the pond are going to go through major changes in the next 10-15 years and many social programs will become unaffordable. I see governments of every first world country making crazy financial and societal choices so rather than depending on government to keep me alive and well I much prefer US salaries allowing me to have money in my own hands. I can put some of that into gold or Bitcoin, or buy an inexpensive apartment in a quiet country with decent finances and reasonable healthcare. Not being totally beholden to the government is what helps me sleep well at night. My 2c.
Im in western europe and I would never let my children walk themselves to school at 6. europe is far from being a safe place minus some eastern europe.
That depends on location within Western Europe. Where I live (also W. Europe), it's common for kids to walk to school from the age of 6, or soon after if the kids are not yet mature enough.
In similar places in the US it may not even be the risk of criminals that is the largest threat. It may simply be that the road network is built for cars only, with few safe ways to cross roads without a vehicle.
By comparison, where I live, parents are expected to act as a kind of traffic police a couple of mornings every year. That means that every place where the kids have to cross the road will have an adult blocking all cars from passing even if a kid is merely getting close (even if the speed limit is only 30km/h or 20mph)
In other words, pedestrians get the highest priority while motorists are treated as second class.
Nation wide, about 50-60% of the kids will walk or ride a bike to school in my country (and those who don't tend to either live far from the school or in a higher crime area).
Compared to ~10% in the US.
Also, while in the US kids of low income households are more likely to (have to) walk to school.
In my country, it's possible that the relationship is, if anything, inversed. Having the kids walk to school is seen by many resourceful families as healthy, both from the physical activity in a screen-rich world and to teach them to be independent and confident.
That means that in neighborhoods with a large percentage of such parents the parents are likely to ensure that the route to school is safe and walkable for kids.
I would also like to see those numbers. IMHO, the biggest difference comes from housing cost. For example, from my own back-of-the-envelope calculations, a £100k Oxbridge job affords a better lifestyle than a $180k NY job mostly because of housing.
However, some US areas have competitively priced housing and jobs that would make the balance tilt in favor of America. In EU, affordable spots with lots of desirable local jobs are becoming increasingly rare. Perhaps Vienna, Wrocław and a few other places in Central/Eastern EU.
I don't know how NY is in comparison, but housing in Cambridge is almost as expensive as in London. A detached 3br starts at £700k. NIMBYs keep killing any expansion of supply.
"Water supply issues are already holding back housing development around the city. In its previous draft water resources management plan, Cambridge Water failed to demonstrate that there was enough to supply all of the new properties in the emerging local plan without risk of deterioration.
The Environment Agency recently confirmed that it had formally objected to five large housing developments in the south of the county because of fears they could not sustainably supply water. It has warned that planning permission for more than 10,000 homes in the Greater Cambridge area and 300,000 square metres of research space at Cambridge University are in jeopardy if solutions cannot be found.
A document published alongside the Case for Cambridge outlines the government’s plan for a two-pronged approach to solving the water scarcity issue, to be led by Dr Paul Leinster, former chief of the Environment Agency, who will chair the Water Scarcity Group.
In the long term, supply will be increased, initially through two new pieces of infrastructure: a new reservoir in the Fens will delivery 43.5 megalitres per day, while a new pipeline will transfer 26 megalitres per day from Grafham Water, currently used by Affinity Water.
But, according to Kelly, a new reservoir would only solve supply requirements for the existing local plan and is “not sufficient if you start to go beyond that” – a point that is conceded in the water scarcity document. "
The NIMBYs are the ones trying to stop the reservoir from being built. They created the problem they're complaining about. A big hole in the ground with water in it is not a complicated piece of infrastructure, but the planning system is so dysfunctional and veto-friendly that the construction timeline has been pushed out into the 2030s, in the best case. Previous generations got them done in two years flat. It is an artificial problem.
Same thing with transport. "We can't build new houses because it would increase car traffic", meanwhile putting up every barrier they can think of to stop East-West Rail.
Just adding onto this because I can't edit: it beggars belief that water supply would ever be a limiting factor for urban growth in England. It's preposterous that this is even an issue. Yes, Cambridgeshire is the driest region in the country, but that's only a relative thing! It still gets quite a lot of rain! Other countries have far less rainfall in absolute terms and they grow their cities just fine, because they build reservoirs and dams and water desalination plants. Nature has not forced this situation on us, we are simply choosing not to build things.
US big tech devs typically make 3x+ what the Euro equivalent does. A 4500 deductible isn't really materially relevant. I (a US dev) have a high deductible plan but my employer contributes substantially to it anyway.
IMO big tech is also a small part of the US sector (I’m not in big tech). The US idolizes FAANG, but there are a heck of a lot of other companies out there.
edit: Yes they do employ a ton of people, but most people I know don’t make those salaries.
I live in a location that wouldn't have public transportation even in Europe. And my healthcare, while not "free," was never expensive outside of fairly small co-pays and a monthly deduction that wasn't cheap but was in the hundreds per month range. Of course, there are high deductible policies but that's a financial choice.
> I would like to see numbers factoring in things like public transportation, health insurance, etc
If that's worth more than $50k or so anyone living in the US that's not making significantly more than the median wage or would be in pretty horrible spot financially.
> hit our very high deductible.
Isn't the maximum deductible that's allowed "only" $16k?
Also taxes are usually significantly higher in Europe with some exceptions (e.g. Switzerland vs California, though you need to pay for your health insurance yourself in Switzerland ).
I think it's worth adding here that US developers can have a much higher burden for things like health insurance. My child broke his arm this year, and we hit our very high deductible.
I would like to see numbers factoring in things like public transportation, health insurance, etc., because I personally feel like EU vs US developers are a lot closer in quality of life after all the deductions.