Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

The myth of big salaries (it's all marketing)

seths.blog

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 245 posts

Re: The myth of big salaries (it's all marketing)

#51

Post by sapphicsnail »

throwitaway222 wrote: post #15

After aging I'm starting to have new views on large salaries: 1. The money is just going to be saved. Net gain to the person is they're probably going to live for the rest of their life off dividends. Net gain to society, is any money taken out of circulation fights inflation. 2. If you pay someone a lot of money they will, essentially, spend it on other people. Either through salary or just buying shit. The richest…

Trickle down economics don't seem to work and while the broader economy isn't a zero sum game an individual company's decision to pay executives more money is a decision not to spend that money elsewhere.

Re: The myth of big salaries (it's all marketing)

#52

Post by gaoshan »

throwitaway222 wrote: post #15

After aging I'm starting to have new views on large salaries: 1. The money is just going to be saved. Net gain to the person is they're probably going to live for the rest of their life off dividends. Net gain to society, is any money taken out of circulation fights inflation. 2. If you pay someone a lot of money they will, essentially, spend it on other people. Either through salary or just buying shit. The richest…

>If you pay someone a lot of money they will, essentially, spend it on other people.

This touches on the concept of trickle down economics and it is generally regarded as not doing what you think it does (or at least, not very effectively).

Re: The myth of big salaries (it's all marketing)

#53

Post by jbs789 »

“In fact, we need more private companies that innovate and pay their staff a ton. But if you're owned by shareholders..”

Private companies are owned by shareholders.

That’s just one of the internal inconsistencies. Bit curious. Leads me to question the whole argument.

Re: The myth of big salaries (it's all marketing)

#54

Post by kevinmchugh »

latexr wrote: post #23

> (Aside: should the guys who drive an armored car that carries millions of dollars in bonds get paid more than the guys that drive an armored car that only carries thousands of dollars in cash? Does the amount of money handled change the difficult of the work?) Possibly, yes. The amount of money handled might affect the likelihood of a heist, and the required preparedness of the robbers. Which in turn requires more…

If the trucks are otherwise identical the thing you should be most worried about is insiders. The cash being more fungible means you maybe should pay the cash drivers more, so they're never tempted to skim off the top or sell details to the heisters.

Re: The myth of big salaries (it's all marketing)

#55

Post by wonderwonder »

This article is pretty shallow and sounds a lot like the people on Reddit calling for the removal of billionaires and how its the fault of the rich that they are struggling without acknowledging the amount of work it takes to become rich. The same people that minimize what people like Musk have accomplished.

If I get paid more, I work harder. There is obviously a realistic limit on how hard I can work. The longer I stay at a company though the more knowledge I have and the more effectively I can utilize my time to accomplish my goals and those of the business.

If I can get a 20% raise somewhere else and do the same amount of work, I will do so. In order to keep me, my company just has to match my new salary offer. Something that they are free to do or reject based on their valuation of what I bring to the table.

A million dollars is a lot of money, but its significantly less if I need to buy a house in California vs Wyoming. The free market does a relatively good job of assigning capital, lets not make up arbitrary caps based on make believe morality.

Re: The myth of big salaries (it's all marketing)

#56

Post by srackey »

Aqueous wrote: post #19

I guess I'm not sure that there's a practical difference between "It's marketing" and "This is what the market rate is for a CEO." In other words, firms need to pay this much because that's what other firms are paying (at least.) That's not marketing - that's just the unfettered market at work. Which is why it needs to be fettered. I agree with the salary cap idea, because the market will naturally keep raising the p…

A salary cap doesn’t change the market rate! It just obfuscates it.

Salaries for public companies locked at 10M/yr? Ok, now firms have to compete on amenities. (Your current firm gives you a free car? Ours gives a jet, a personal Michelin star cook, and complimentary beverages)

Re: The myth of big salaries (it's all marketing)

#57

Post by crazygringo »

toast0 wrote: post #18

> After a million dollars or so in salary, the absolute amount that a person is paid has no real impact on their life. They can't eat more meals in a day or wear more shoes. What matters to the manager is the relative amount. Sure, nobody needs more than a million dollars in annual compensation (in 2024 dollars), but relative amount gets you to your never need to work again number faster or slower. You might still wo…

Yeah, a million dollars a year is not anywhere close to where having more money doesn't impact you.

If that's $600K after taxes, and a year of college for a single child costs $80K at an excellent school, and you've got two or three kids, and housing in a major metropolitan area...

I mean you're definitely living very comfortably, but there are still lots of ways to spend money that have a big impact on your life, between your home and child care and your vacations and your comfort in traveling.

If the number is $25 million, then sure there isn't much more difference. Probably even $5 million. But $1 million still has plenty of room for very meaningful life improvement, that isn't anywhere near private jets. Not that you need, but that it's entirely normal to want.

Re: The myth of big salaries (it's all marketing)

#58

Post by [deleted] »

toast0 wrote: post #18

> After a million dollars or so in salary, the absolute amount that a person is paid has no real impact on their life. They can't eat more meals in a day or wear more shoes. What matters to the manager is the relative amount. Sure, nobody needs more than a million dollars in annual compensation (in 2024 dollars), but relative amount gets you to your never need to work again number faster or slower. You might still wo…

[deleted]

Re: The myth of big salaries (it's all marketing)

#59

Post by jncfhnb »

throwitaway222 wrote: post #15

After aging I'm starting to have new views on large salaries: 1. The money is just going to be saved. Net gain to the person is they're probably going to live for the rest of their life off dividends. Net gain to society, is any money taken out of circulation fights inflation. 2. If you pay someone a lot of money they will, essentially, spend it on other people. Either through salary or just buying shit. The richest…

Number 1 is a terrible point as well. Fighting inflation is an entirely contextual problem.

Re: The myth of big salaries (it's all marketing)

#60

Post by ifyoubuildit »

danbruc wrote: post #50
toast0 wrote: post #18

> After a million dollars or so in salary, the absolute amount that a person is paid has no real impact on their life. They can't eat more meals in a day or wear more shoes. What matters to the manager is the relative amount. Sure, nobody needs more than a million dollars in annual compensation (in 2024 dollars), but relative amount gets you to your never need to work again number faster or slower. You might still wo…

Consuming without working for it is immoral, flying privat jets and traveling more is bad for the environment. Those are not reasons in favor of higher salaries.

The idea here is that they did the work up front and then saved to accumulate wealth which they could spend later. Is that immoral to you?
Post reply on HN