And on the right, Fox let go some of longtime staffers who were not sympathetic to the networks coverage of the 2020 elections.
ESPN fired Jemele Hill for calling Trump a white supremacist.
If you want to claim that the NY Times is left-leaning than I would agree. It's a newspaper in one of the most liberal cities in the country. Its ethos are probably more reflective of that than any elite orthodoxy.
I would say it jumps to unsupported conclusions. It is true that few companies own most of the mainstream media produced in this country.
As someone else who worked at one of these companies stated, that these companies are just pedaling propaganda to serve elites or oligarchs needs much more evidence to substantiate such claims.
Most of these are public companies whose primary motives are just to make a profit.
These companies have millions of employees with diverse opinions and diverse sources of content production.
So, I think the article oversteps its claims that the mdeia in this country just serves the interest of some set of elites.
The article doesn't really show how this situation has evolved over time. Before cable didn't we essentially only have CBS, NBC, and ABC?
When I see other sources like OANN, or the disinformation being peddled from some corners, I am not sure what is a better alternative.
These media companies also employ a large number of people with diverse opinions. To suggest that a small group of elites are controlling the output of these companies is far fetched.
For some reason, a certain segment of Americans, have lost trust in these institutions that have been there all along. I fear the alternative.
I'm personally not L6+ and totally agree that if you can get to 6 then your compensation changes drastically.
At my previous company, I had stock options which had I held onto them would have been roughly comparable in value to my current stock grants.
But I agree that the biggest advantage over other companies are the stock grants, which have much less risk than supplemental compensation at other companies.
The moral of the story is that one really has to get to L6+ at Google to really earn money that one couldn't earn elsewhere.
IMO, that can be difficult depending on what projects you work on, your soft skills, and ability.
I routinely get solicited about jobs that have quite a bit higher compensation than Google's, particularly in finance.
In comparison, The median SWE salary is around ~123K in SV with a median home price in Mountain View of ~1.6m.
IMO, there are better options than SV. I would much rather be working in an area like Austin with a much more reasonable COL with a relatively small drop in median salary.
See my comment above. Basically, this would be challenging to do even at Google depending on the level you get promoted to and requires total dedication to the above, i.e., saving aggressively.
I think the advantage of getting into Google right out of school is that you can start on that path right away.
I didn't get to Google until working for over 10 years at other companies and as such and I wasn't really planning for such a goal so, for me personally, I will be lucky if I can retire when I am 60.
What I gave was a best case estimate if someone was really diligent, saving very aggressively, investing wisely, and contributing the maximum amount to retirement accounts.
As someone who has been working for over 20 years and the last 10 at Google, I am not close to retiring and I don't believe the compensation at Google is that much greater than other software jobs, as my previous compensation was comparable.
So what am I saying, yes, you might be able to retire early if you work at Google a long time and are very diligent, but you probably could do the same at most other software jobs in the region.
If you really want to make life changing money at a FAANG company you have to get promoted to a certain level, which isn't easy, IMO.
Otherwise, your life isn't that different than any other software engineers.
Well, if you look at the cost of living in SV the salaries aren't that insane. Buying a house is challenging on a Google salary in that area depending on level.
If you get in right out of college and live meagerly, than yes, you might be able to retire early if you leave that area.
If you actually want to build a life in the Bay Area and buy property, you will probably have to work at least 20 years to have enough for retirement or get promoted high enough where you really are making a lot of money.
I think it depends on where you are in Google as in what team/org. I haven't seen much of what this original poster describes on the teams I have worked on.
My limited anecdotal experience, however, is that people work less at the European offices than in the US.
ESPN fired Jemele Hill for calling Trump a white supremacist.
If you want to claim that the NY Times is left-leaning than I would agree. It's a newspaper in one of the most liberal cities in the country. Its ethos are probably more reflective of that than any elite orthodoxy.