Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login

For point #1, perhaps neither scenario is "equitable". "Equal pay" may sound equitable given the horribly biased example given, but look at the converse case:

> You have two people doing the same job but if you live in Romania and your colleague lives in the US at

a company that pays both equally

> Then after your career you’ll go and retire in Spain. Guess who’ll afford a better lifestyle?

That's right - You, the Romanian citizen.

Since your cost of living is 42.4% cheaper than your US colleague, you'll have much more disposable income to invest over the course of your career.

Let's say you both make an after-tax income of $60,000 USD. If your colleague pays $40,000 a year for rent/food/transportation/clothing/staples and another $5,000 for (optional) non-essentials, then they'll have $15,000 to invest.

You will spend roughly $23,000 on the same essentials and another $3,000 on non-essentials, leaving you $34,000 to invest annually.

If you both invest in the S&P500, and it continues to return around 10% annually, then you both move to Spain to retire after 30 number of years, you'll have just over $5.5 million USD compared to your US colleague's ~ $2.5million.

https://www.mylifeelsewhere.com/cost-of-living/united-states... - Although the basic principle holds as long as there's any cost of living difference. Also doesn't include tax or healthcare.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: