This is interesting as it relates to price rather than ability to find a job. Things would have to change dramatically to reach a point where someone won't pay you minimum wage to do tech work, but as difficulty in fulfilling positions declines the need to pay extraordinary and increasing salaries will decline in kind. This does give a good idea about what's ahead for compensation adjustments. The double digit percentage pay bumps people were taking advantage of over the last couple of years is no doubt over (for now).
So I think a lower volume in the hiring thread has a stronger impact on people who are struggling, since they necessarily need to apply to a high number of places, compared to the impact on people who are going to get multiple competitive offers regardless.
I'm not sure that's the right perspective. It's true that offering Google a chance to hire you for minimum wage isn't going to win you a seat. But most potential employers aren't putting themselves in front of the market because they believe nobody out there will work for less than a healthy six figures (or whatever).
I walk down the street of a small town and see endless businesses who understand where they could improve their business with tech, but also know they'd be bankrupted in a matter of days if they had to pay FAANG-level salaries. They don't even bother trying to hire tech talent. At $7.25 per hour, however, now you've got their interest.
Most tech employers who make job posts might be happy if you suggest a salary near the bottom of the range they've already decided for the position, but will absolutely take it as a negative if you come in far below their range, especially if it's clear you're doing that because you're desperate.
I'm not arguing anything. There is nothing here to argue. Nor would I enter into an argument. I can think of nothing more boring.
> literally walking down the street and offering to help random businesses for $7.25 an hour is so far from HN hiring, or really any salaried tech hiring
Because the topic is price. Price exists specifically to guide allocation of scarce resources. The scarcer a resource, the higher the price, the more buyers pushed out of the market. Conversely, the more available the resource, the lower the price, the more buyers able to participate in the market. Just plain old supply and demand.
Like I said originally, things would have to change dramatically for things to end up where nobody would hire you even for minimum wage. Without some kind of fundamental shift, there is effectively no chance of developers not being able to find work. What is more realistic is someone not being able to find work at the price they'd like. If you're accustomed to making $200k per year, get laid off, and those hiring are only offering $120k that can be a hard pill to swallow. Many will hold out for a better offer. Eventually, though, hunger sets in and you may be forced to take the $120k job. If things are really bad, $120k might be more than you can hope for.
> I'm not sure why you bring it up
There was some confusion about the earlier comment and I found enjoyment in expanding upon it. Perhaps there still is confusion, but oh well.
This all leads into the question of how rational and efficient the hiring market for developers is. I would say this is at least an open question, to put it mildly.
I am quite specifically talking about price. Maybe you still carry confusion. Maybe you replied to the wrong thread. Maybe you're desperate for that argument you hoped I was engaging in. But whatever it is, we're not talking about that. That is certain.
I explicitly acknowledged and agreed with your statement. What you said jives with what I said. Which stands to reason as there is nothing to argue here, as we covered earlier.
Indeed, you originally came at the subject from a different angle and I did point that out to orient ourselves on the same plane to make communication easier, but nothing about the subject changes as it relates to the angle of approach. The destination is the same no matter what direction you come from.
We can certainly work from different angles, but it will be more work. That said, I'm not sure what is left to work on. Your comment merely indicates that you also recognize that we're not coming at this from the same angle, which is something that we already established many comments ago. This suggests to me that the meat of discussion has already reached its natural end.
There are places like Upwork and fiverr where people are hiring cheap programmers to work on things like their small wordpress site. They aren't fun to work on and there is a lot of competition from lower cost of living parts of the world, but they do exist.
Once you have a "foot in the door" and some proven industry experience you'll find getting work a lot easier. It took me about six months after I first started applying to secure my first development job in 2019, and now I have tons of recruiters messaging me daily about new opportunities.
Brands go on sale to move excess inventory or to try to convert skeptical shoppers into becoming loyal to the brand later on at full price. However for better or worse there's no way for a job seeker to put themselves temporarily on sale. You can't work at a discount without devaluing yourself. This is important to understand because it means that it's not entirely about job seekers simply accepting lower pay.