I'd assume, although I'd have to admit I don't know for sure, that opportunities for pay are similar in New York/Chicago/San Francisco as they are here in London, UK. By which I mean that if I could find a job here in London paying me £150k then there'd be some equivalent job paying $250k (i.e. simply FX'd) in the USA. From what I've seen on the internet and of friends in the last five years, salaries for similar work at similar levels do seem roughly equivalent (maybe slightly better in the US).
If you wanted to earn £150k in the UK at age 29/30 (leaving university at 21/22 with 3 + 5 years of work as I suggested) one way would be to work in financial IT. A salary of £70-100k wouldn't be unreasonable if you were very good and a bonus of 50-100% would be possible, again if you're very good. I'm not in this situation myself so don't speak form direct experience but I know people in the industry who almost certainly are (it'd be rude to ask...).
If this all sounds far fetched, I work at a fund which is on track to make a profit per employee of around $500k this year (and as everyone knows, this is a bad year). Even given that bonuses are skewed towards the researchers that means they can still afford to reward the best IT people handsomely. And they're sensible enough with money to know that there are people in IT who they really couldn't afford to lose so they will pay accordingly.
If you wanted to earn £150k in the UK at age 29/30 (leaving university at 21/22 with 3 + 5 years of work as I suggested) one way would be to work in financial IT. A salary of £70-100k wouldn't be unreasonable if you were very good and a bonus of 50-100% would be possible, again if you're very good. I'm not in this situation myself so don't speak form direct experience but I know people in the industry who almost certainly are (it'd be rude to ask...).
If this all sounds far fetched, I work at a fund which is on track to make a profit per employee of around $500k this year (and as everyone knows, this is a bad year). Even given that bonuses are skewed towards the researchers that means they can still afford to reward the best IT people handsomely. And they're sensible enough with money to know that there are people in IT who they really couldn't afford to lose so they will pay accordingly.