It sounds to me as if you are saying average wages are not increasing because of the influx of young developers. Isn't that exactly the point the article makes, that the non-increasing wages indicate that there is no shortage of tech workers?
It also seems unlikely that the decreasing averages don't affect the wages of older tech workers. They compete with the young, cheap tech workers after all - why should companies continue to pay high salaries to old tech workers if they could replace them with cheap young tech workers?
why should companies continue to pay high salaries to old tech workers if they could replace them with cheap young tech workers?
Because young workers are not a substitute for old workers.
You could argue that four fresh graduates are a substitute for a single good senior dev, but in many cases even that is not true. Thus, old guys continue to find good jobs for good money.
This worry is as old as software. The cheap hordes will replace you. It used to be cheap hordes from overseas, and now it's cheap hordes fresh out of school. They're on there way. But somehow they never seem to arrive.
They're on there way. But somehow they never seem to arrive.
I wonder if that's because the demand keeps increasing. Software is eating the world. Sure, supply is increasing from overseas, and young people, but demand is growing more.
Non-increasing wages is a statistical mirage, not a statement which is a truthful depiction of on-the-ground reality. The overwhelming experience of actual, countable persons is that their wages have increased substantially. The only reason this does not raise the aggregate wage is because too many people have increased from $0 to a number which is, relative to the average, low. (You occasionally see this in larger economy statistics, often as a result of immigration, by the way. "Wages are frozen since the 70s!" is not all that true -- wages are way up for Mexicans who are now Americans, mildly up for Americans who are still Americs, etc.)
Although your argument could be correct, I am unconvinced:
Everyone sees their wages increase substantially, as they gain experience. This does not mean that wages are increasing.
Inflationary effects should be taken into account - wages should at least increase with inflation. Everyone seems satisfied to receive a 5% pay increase, even if that is a freeze in real terms.
If wages were indeed frozen since the 70s, your actual countable people may not notice due to the above two effects. I gather that you understood that, but I thought it worth making clear.
Your argument boils down to the idea that wage figures are biased by the fact there are more new entrants into STEM careers than there were in the past. Do you have evidence for that? I suggest (based on the graduate figures) this may not be the case.
On your point about Mexicans creating low paid work:
I would assume that immigrants are now doing jobs that Americans used to do - so it's not that they have created additional low paid work that biases the statistics, it's just that they have taken over a portion of the low paid work.
So, I think this should not be taken into account in the stats.
It's unclear whether immigrants are doing jobs that Americans used to do, or whether additional low paid work was created. I lean towards the latter, but I don't know how to prove it.
However, the data does show that when you restrict the data to Americans with American parents, incomes have risen for everyone outside the top quintile.
Not really, influx does not automatically imply lack of shortage. I think there is a common impression of quite the contrary: a demand bubble, at least in my local SFBA tech scene. Replacement may not be happening because of a demand spike and/or other reasons having to do with cheap young tech workers not being the right fit, or not being perceived as a right fit, etc.
It also seems unlikely that the decreasing averages don't affect the wages of older tech workers. They compete with the young, cheap tech workers after all - why should companies continue to pay high salaries to old tech workers if they could replace them with cheap young tech workers?