I think most people here can. That's why, when people have enough money to retire, they DO retire, and not continue working. Work for most people is trading time and physical and mental health for money. In our profession, we got it better than most, but the underlying principle is still the same.
Also, there are definitely better and worse companies. I'm currently in the best job of my life (well paying, fully remote, very little meetings, no micromanagement, using interesting and cutting edge technology), but it took me 15 years to get there. The catch is that such companies don't have to hire that often (because people don't tend to leave them), so most openings at the market in any given moment are from shit companies where average tenure is 18-24 months and half of the staff has low-grade depression. The job market is essentially a market for lemons, unfortunately.
I disagree about the retirement thing - I knew a lot of multi-millionaires from a very successful IPO who kept working for 5+ years afterwards. Even fully vested they had all their friends at work, they had a lot of influence, it was like a weird little social club for mostly dudes who didn't really have other hobbies outside of work.
I agree about the second half, though. My current job is just a terrible meat grinder, hiring and churning like crazy, and they just keep pouring gas on the fire by trying to grow headcount without retaining people they already have. Everyone is sick of interviewing and the solution is to hire more people so the new people can start interviewing and take some pressure off the old people.
I don't think this contradicts the statement "I think most people here can [relate]"
Yes, a million $/€/£ isn't what it once was, and being a millionaire isn't in itself an indicator of exceptional riches, but the term "multi-millionaire" still certainly implies a level of wealth that sets one apart from the average (even among ycombinator-readers).
And I would imagine you're proportionally much less likely to be a fan of the industry inversely to the measure of the safety net / impetus-to-participate-in-the-rat-race-of-9-to-5 you possess.
What's relatable to me about your post as well as the ancestors posts is mostly about the comfort level allowing one to actually enjoy the industry.
For example, when I wasn't comfortable, I was always chasing the next language/framework so that I was marketable to someone else's company, and this was actually at the expense of the best solution for whatever company I was at. It was always like "lets make this new microservice, in this new language", "let's refactor this whole project but blame 100% of it on the prior developer and no other ulterior motive whatsoever", "what's the personal development budget again? sure, I'll tell you all about my goal of learning this new language you don't use". Most of the engineers are doing it. If you're drowning, save yourself first.
and now its fantasticaly liberating for me to simply not have to do that! It opens up other possibilities I couldn't understand, such as learning a super niche and new language even if the payoff wasn't clear, this allows me to contribute to projects that I would have ruled out and ironically become more marketable when the premium is highest. It allows me to dive deeper into more time-tested languages, and more.
The retirement bit seems more like an American-centric thing. I've worked on various projects involving American and European companies, and to be honest the European workers seem much more content with their work-life.
I can only assume that it is because of stronger labor laws, more relaxed work/life balance, etc.
Some of my American (contractor) colleagues would work like dogs for 6 days a week, often from early in the morning to late in the night - depending on the status of the project. It was the first time I observed actual burnout in people, and how visibly it changes people and their personalities.
In any case - most of them, especially those over 40, would often discuss their big plans: Only work 5-10 more years, then retire, and live life.
If 50-60 hour weeks, all year round, is any good indicator of American SWE life - I can understand why devs. are daydreaming about retirement.
Yeah.. first shocking thing in my transnational company was that they only have 10 days of vacation vs our usual 30... and they envy us always for our 3week long vacations, while their is usually used up already with Christmas?
Then those sentences here in multiple posts about it being normal to put in extra weekend days, wtf?
Add to this they even completely had to return to office 5days a week..
..and this is for high skilled tech workers, how bad is it for the rest? While at the same time the world seems to even now discover 4day weeks... what's going on over there? It sounds like modern slavery and you may need more unions and less socialism-fear :D
> European workers seem much more content with their work-life
So content they actually are asked and want to be kept employed with halfed work hours or similar even after retirement age, because their experience brings value to juniors, not because of the money but they don't feel like retiring but want to be further useful... not for everyone sure.
I do think you might have gotten a rather skewed view of the situation in the US. In the ten years I've been working professionally I've never had to work weekends, for example, and I currently have 30 days of vacation (plus another eight or so sick days). I realize the amount of vacation I get is unusually high, but I think three or four weeks is normal.
That said, while I am reasonably well compensated I don't make enough to retire early. At my current trajectory I'm not sure I make enough to retire full stop ... so I might just be working until I die after all.
I can retire around 50, where I now live in Scandinavia/Norway. But that comes down to me currently living in a low cost of living area - my house is basically worth 10% of those in major cities. But I also don't have to think about stuff like healthcare, which is a big plus when it's time to retire.
Can the average US tech worker take 3+ week long holidays every year (which are great for disconnecting), like clockwork? I highly doubt that, I've seen it in several American companies, where most of my US colleagues would basically only get what I'd call "bird droppings": 1-2-3-5 days here and there.
Even though on paper the average tech worker might have 20+ days off, if the culture is not there, peer pressure will kind of force you to compromise in other ways.
> The catch is that such companies don't have to hire that often
I'm in a similar position (not remote though) and yeah... my boss told me during my first year that the guy who was hired before me said he'd only stay 2-3 years, and that was 6 years ago. It's almost 10 years later and we're both here, along with the rest.
We're a small company though, so like you say, we've just hired a few programmers since I started.
Similar experience - I went through 12 years of horrible employers before I found a good one. I was there for 8 years before moving on to something bigger and better, which I love even more.
Part of what I realized in that 12 years was that I by the time I was ready to bail I was so frustrated and hated life so much that anything _but_ this current position looked good, which opened the door to taking something that was equally as horrible. I've long advocated in starting at the bottom and working your way up, but there is a limit as to how much abuse a person can take. If the climate goes south you have to bail. The long term consequences of not are higher than the immediate annoying ones (relocating, etc.).
That rarely is a solution, though. Most work in this world feels unpleasant, just by virtue of the environment and many factors ruining the experience. It's like that twist on the old adage: "Do what you love and you'll ruin your love of it." Soon as you start to monetize something you love, it becomes a hassle and a chore.
I disagree about having it the best healthwise. My back is killing me and I burned out multiple times from stress. I'm not comparing myself to a fireman or something like this, but I would change my job for something more outdoorsy anytime if it paid the same.
90% of outdoorsy jobs would ruin your back as well, just in a slightly different way and they'd pay a lot less which would mean your stress would come from money troubles instead of office politics and culture.
Somehow I just visualized the job market as analogous to the romantic dating pool for people past say 35. That complaint about all the good ones being taken, and those who get back into the scene have baggage by that point and several failures along the way. I've never conceived of the job market like that, puts a whole new spin on it when I conceptualize it as such.
Yes, this is a crucial insight that should be tattoo'd on every new grad's forehead! Less desirable jobs are overrepresented in the market because they have more turnover, by definition.
> The job market is essentially a market for lemons, unfortunately.
Practically by accident. I didn't know the job was so nice before I got into it. I might have helped my luck by moving to a niche area which is dominated by nerds (Scala, with a Haskel-like functional bend). So, if a company is allowing the use of such, frankly crazy, technology, then it means that it is treating its tech people seriously, or is ran itself by crazy tech nerds.
Also, there are definitely better and worse companies. I'm currently in the best job of my life (well paying, fully remote, very little meetings, no micromanagement, using interesting and cutting edge technology), but it took me 15 years to get there. The catch is that such companies don't have to hire that often (because people don't tend to leave them), so most openings at the market in any given moment are from shit companies where average tenure is 18-24 months and half of the staff has low-grade depression. The job market is essentially a market for lemons, unfortunately.