l extraction in GDP (22% [3]) which skews the
result. If you subtract oil share from the GDP, you get $56,195.88 nominal GDP
per capita, which is almost the same as the American one ($57,220)!

Now Luxembourg is a tax haven/financial center with a population of half a
million so I don't think it's a relevant comparison. Just due to population to
get something close to true pay average you would have to ask a relatively (to
other countries) very big percentage of their developers.

Same site for comparable data

[0]
[http://www.payscale.com/research/CH/Job=Software_Engineer/Sa...](http://www.payscale.com/research/CH/Job=Software_Engineer/Salary)

[1]
[http://www.payscale.com/research/US/Job=Software_Developer/S...](http://www.payscale.com/research/US/Job=Software_Developer/Salary)

[2]
[http://www.payscale.com/research/NO/Job=Software_Developer/S...](http://www.payscale.com/research/NO/Job=Software_Developer/Salary)

[3] [https://www.ssb.no/en/befolkning/artikler-og-
publikasjoner/_...](https://www.ssb.no/en/befolkning/artikler-og-
publikasjoner/_attachment/237252?_ts=1516c73e3a8) page 40, graph

~~~
igravious
Dude. You're not getting the objection. We're not objecting to the numeric
ratios, we're objecting to using those numbers in the first place.

> GDP per capita seems to be a curious way to estimate if a local dev is
> likely to be productive.

Curious is putting it mildly. :) What is being objected to is your _measure_.
Stop using the GDP per capita _of an entire country_ as a proxy for software
developer productivity. It's frankly stupid. Anyway GDP per capita using PPP
(purchasing power parity) is seen as a fairer comparison. But even GDP per
capita by PPP is a stupid metric to compare software developer productivity.
I'm sorry for using the word stupid. But it's stupid.

~~~
duckingtest
>Stop using the GDP per capita of an entire country as a proxy for software
developer productivity. It's frankly stupid.

Outside of entertainment where software is a direct consumer product, the
developer's productivity c