What I mean is, Europe generally does not even come close to that level of pay/compensation. So I assumed that these are US based startups. I could be wrong though.
Yes but you (generally) get other things like universal healthcare, free or cheap university, retirement plans, no need for a car due to proper urban planning, etc. In the US you have to shell out for all these things, paying into a private 401(k) for retirement, paying back student loan debt, paying for your health insurance etc. And these are at well funded tech firms.
While true, that doesn't even come close to filling the gap.
In Berlin "the silicon valley of Europe", as people here like to say, there are pretty much zero engineering jobs paying >$100k/year. There is some magical ceiling of around $90k/year, no matter how senior you are. This isn't only true for startups but pretty much any company.
That's one of the reasons I work remote for Silicon Valley.
There's also the fact that US in general has higher living costs, even if they are not immediately evident. Take for instance the price of renting a shitty one person flat in Berlin vs San Francisco. Not to mention that in most European countries you don't have to tip 30% over the price of a meal because waiter salaries here are actually enough to cover living costs.
On the other hand, costs in SV are way higher than Berlin. Berlin has very low living costs, even compared to other European (and German) cities. With $90k/yr you probably have the same living standard as in SV with twice as much. Probably even a higher standard, with $90k/year in Germany you can afford a large appartment, eat out regularly, don't have to worry about retirement or health care.
Of course living in a cheap area and being paid the salary of the high cost area is always better. But that's not specific to Berlin.
"$90k/year in Germany you can afford a large appartment, eat out regularly, don't have to worry about retirement or health care" - That's definitely true. But I'd argue with similar profile you can make at least 2x that in SV at which point I don't think you have to worry about those things either, even if you pay $5k/month for your apartment.
You already get healthcare with US startups.. so that isn't a "benefit" of Europe.
"Proper urban planning?" Hah. In Paris you pay San Franscico housing prices or you spend over an hour on strike-prone un-air conditioned buses or trains.
As far as retirement plans, pay me more and I'll invest it myself. If I make $150k per year, that's almost triple a French salary -- plenty of extra money to start my own damned retirement fund without depending on the government.
On top of that in Europe the small salary you do get is subject to confiscatory tax rates. Then (in France at least, you have a 20% VAT, high fuel costs and higher costs for basic utilities.) Food costs more, services cost more -- everything costs more. At the end of the day your net income is far far less than the US, even factoring in all of the 'free' stuff. But hey at least you can get employer sponsored 'free' lunch cheques and mandatory vacation time.
I live in France and I like living here, but I pay dearly for that benefit. I am not here because it's a good value. Financially and socially and well as entrepreneurially I would be better off in Houston, but I love the Provençal weather, the wine and the laid back feel of living in the countryside -- but a good value? Definitely not. If I had to survive on a French salary, there'd be no way I would choose to live here.
Would it be fair to say that your personal valuation of the Provençal weather, the wine and the laid back feel of living in the countryside is greater than the salary difference of working in a high-paying US company?
There is no tech job in the French countryside, so basically you cannot live there.
If you have to go to Paris, it is one of the worst place for tech talent (relative to the other major EU cities). Higher costs of living, lower income, limited competition for talents.
That healthcare in europe or any of the social security systems are better is just left-wing propaganda. My health insurance costs me 270$/m whereas in my home country Germany I would have to pay 15.6% which is limited to 678.60€(721.61)/month in the government health insurance. There is predictions and plans that the government retirement insurance mandatory fee will increase to 23-25% in 2030(Currently ~19%). That's just socialist insanity if you ask me. I'm gladly paying my 401k :)
You're missing the crucial fact that you pay half and your employer pays the other half! From an employee point of view it's 8.4% for health insurance and 9.35% for pension (how much are you contributing to your 401k?).
Public health insurance also covers your spouse and children for free, along with any pre-existing medical conditions. Having to cover my wife's minor pre-existing condition basically ruled out ever living in the USA for us.
Take into account what will insurance be if you have kids, not to mention that even with insurance you will usually still get an invoice after visit to the doctor/hospital (correct me if I am wrong), which may be substantial amount of money (even after insurance negotiations, etc.).
Don't know how it's in US but in EU you have around 20-30 days of payed holidays, payed sick leave, payed _sick child_ leave (!). For example my coworker's 2 kids and wife had severe pneumonia, full treatment took around 2 or 3 months and he could help his family on paid sick leave that whole time. I do not know how much it would've cost in US but it would be a significant amount of money, not to mention that you would still needed either to work, to take unpaid leave or to quit.
It's all about averages. You maybe healthy (now) and do not pay much, but what if some serious illness hits you or your family member? What if you will get some chronic illness/condition? On those cases your insurance price may be adjusted.
To be fair, I want social health care to be more efficient and economical, i.e. not to pay 1/3 of my earned money for it, but I am treating it as a cost for my sanity and not needing to worry about some shit luck hitting me and insurance twisting their ass out of the situation, as insurance's goal is to pay you out as little money as possible.
that's partially true, but you forget european countries usually have higher tax than US (not only income tax, but also VAT, fuel tax, etc).
here in London a mid-level engineer, which I assume is the bottom half of senior software engineers, are typically paid £50-£60k/year in startups, which usually have poor pension schemes. £50k is about $60k and you already start paying for 40% tax for the top £10k of your salary.
You can get more if you go to big companies but then so can you in the US.
That might be true for start-ups. VP level engineer in the bank can yield £80-120K and that does not include bonuses and other perks.
If you plan to run a start-up, and you can have remote first organisation (physical co-location is not required by say client attendance or manufacturing process) then do so!
And if you do stay in London, compete with banks for best talent with your wallets, not ping-pong tables.
I was talking about mid-level engineers in startups, not senior engineers in banks, if you want to compare big employers, £80-£120k is nothing compared with $250-300k you get as senior developer in Silicon Valley.
Well, the 1 bedroom in London is far from 3000-4000 per month.
I don't know the details of the costs of living and all the expenses. Maybe SV is better but I just want to say that it is not twice as better, contrary to what some comments would have you think.
The cost of living in SF is 1.4 times higher but the wage is 1.75 times higher. Note this number is assuming you are renting, and not considering electronics which is a lot cheaper in the US.
The house price in London is still more expensive, and if you are a senior developer in your 30s that's probably more relevant than renting price.
Factor those in, as a software developer, in SV you are easily 30-50% better off than London, the best paid city in Europe. The pay gap between Europe and US do exist, Silicon Valley is the technology centre of the world, Europe isn't.
So basically, a mid-range profession in the US is comparable to a mid-range profession in the EU, a high-end profession in the US earns heaps more, and a low-end profession (or unskilled job) in the US means you're screwed?
Although not true in all cases, many of those cities that were built before the distinct concept of urban planning existed were also built and grew large before cars existed. So they grew naturally in in a way that's fairly pedestrian friendly.
In contrast, many cities in the U.S. and Canada grew very rapidly from the 1960s to the present, so you'll often see big cities with a nice (but relatively small) walkable downtown surrounded by vast stretches of generic, car-friendly, pedestrian-hostile suburbs.
In the Toronto area, at least, there are plenty of suburban areas that are nominally served by transit, but it is so inadequate that you'll usually need a car to get anywhere in a reasonable amount of time.
Looks like there are only US based startupts. At least 39 % of the start ups were located in the Bay area, so that must distort the figure quite a bit I guess.
Keep in mind how heavily we are taxed at higher income brackets, higher living expenses, and also that "US salary" is a huge overgeneralization. Startups in third and fourth tier startup cities might pay 1/3-1/2 of what's in SF, etc. Comp varies a lot.
