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

CEOs’ pay climbed before layoffs at tech giants like Alphabet and Microsoft

southernillinoisnow.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

301–310 of 357 posts

Re: CEOs’ pay climbed before layoffs at tech giants like Alphabet and Microsoft

#301

Post by satvikpendem »

swozey wrote: post #297
satvikpendem wrote: post #294

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That'll show 'em.

Bro, satvik. I'm happy to hear your responses and learn from you but you're literally just attacking me at this point. It's absolutely hilarious. You think you're going to take me down or something weird. I'm trying so hard to take this seriously because you think you're going to post a tweet and get me nuked from society. I'm looking at your previous posts and trying to find things that aren't "zero to hero" type ja…

Buddy, HostGator employee, I honestly have no idea what you're even talking about, regarding trawling through posts I've made and trying to find "gems", whatever that means. Seems you get easily aggressive towards anyone that challenges your comments, in this thread and others, telling people to "fuck off", that "literally nobody asked for their opinion" (on a public forum) and trying to find some gotcha in their posts, as if that means anything. All I said to you was that your response was weird and you immediately start popping off about being asked for an opinion, on a public forum. I don't care about you, much less "take you down," lol. You're the one who immediately started spouting personal insults after people calmly commented, so if you can't handle people commenting, get some anger management classes and perhaps step off, king.

Re: CEOs’ pay climbed before layoffs at tech giants like Alphabet and Microsoft

#302

Post by satvikpendem »

dakial1 wrote: post #299
swozey wrote: post #287

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Literally nobody asked your opinion of how he uses his domains. But thanks for your sage response. Please continue playing devils advocate in situations you're completely ignorant toward. It really benefits everyone.

Redditization of HN is impressive. Kcplate comment is totally fair and relevant, but it seems Swozey does not care about fair and relevant...

[flagged]

Re: CEOs’ pay climbed before layoffs at tech giants like Alphabet and Microsoft

#304

Post by RugnirViking »

jvmfjvfjvf wrote: post #90
RugnirViking wrote: post #80

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A distinction without a difference. Nobody is getting cash in that amount

There is a huge difference, If Google stock underperforms, he is not getting that compensation unlike salaried folks.

well it's extremely unlikely to go to zero, and it can just as likely if not more so go up. He's almost certainly going to be offloading the stock at a pre-agreed rate, the kind of rate that means him and his children and grandchildren will never want for anything in their lives. It also exists as an asset, meaning he can borrow against it if for whatever bizzare reason he needs more.

just like everyone with net worths over something like 10 million. Like I say, almost nobody has cash/fully liquid assets in those amounts. Doesn't stop them from commanding vast amounts of resources on lavish lifstyles, not to mention foolhardy projects and follies on the regular.

Re: CEOs’ pay climbed before layoffs at tech giants like Alphabet and Microsoft

#305

Post by tester756 »

rpastuszak wrote: post #173
tester756 wrote: post #155

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> and you can't tell me he somehow converts that to 1000x the labor of an average, capable, willing, working employee. Yes, I can't tell you that because CEO isn't about labor. I can tell you that impact of decisions of the CEO that I work for is at least 1000x bigger than mine. If you don't believe that I don't know what to tell you. CEO is not about writing lines of code, he doesn't write 1000x more LoC than I do,…

I think this misses one important point though: why would any human being need this amount of money and could these resources be allocated better? If we look more broadly than a single employee or a single business entity fwiw, this feels like a huge waste of resources.

I think that:

Not many people can actually perform this job.

This kind of job requires really solid skillset across various domains.

It feels like you not only need to be great at managing people, doing business, doing politics (the real one), having vision, but also do not be bullshitter, so your employees believe in you.

Meanwhile, CEOs strategies aren't something you can test within a month or two and fire CEO and get a new one.

In some industries you need at least a few years in order to see whether specific "bet" was good, so you aren't going to fire your CEO after half of the year.

Meanwhile CEOs decision can have very very costly impact on the company, so the risk is huge.

Re: CEOs’ pay climbed before layoffs at tech giants like Alphabet and Microsoft

#306

Post by [deleted] »

swozey wrote: post #286
ffhhttt wrote: post #254

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But you didn’t really say anything besides it being ‘impolite’.. which is rarely the best reason to not do something

I don't know where your sense of entitlement is coming from, but first off, I don't owe you any information whatsoever. Not to mention the name of the company is absolutely irrelevant to the conversation we were having before you involved yourself literally only asking this question. I hoped, apparently wrongly, that someone could infer from me not bringing the name up myself that maybe I don't want to be associated…

[deleted]

Re: CEOs’ pay climbed before layoffs at tech giants like Alphabet and Microsoft

#307

Post by Aerbil313 »

mathverse wrote: post #267
firecall wrote: post #255

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, we need to fix the mechanisms that have allowed so much wealth to accrued by individuals. Companies need to be taxed correctly. They need to give back to the societies that built the social structures that allowed them to be created and thrive.

I would somehow tax inactive capital. Capital that is not directly invested in a company or pays for employees. Everything laying around or on the stock market should be heavily taxed.

Islam bans stock markets and interest (though not all current so-called muslim countries) and every person who is rich (who have more than 87 grams of gold worth of things) is obliged to donate %2.5 of their total wealth to the poor every year. In Muslim countries, the state collects and distributes this, so it's effectively a tax. Necessities of life (shelter etc.) are excluded from total value calculation. Muslim countries traditionally took away land of people who didn't utilize it for 3 consecutive years, though idk whether this is rooted in the religion itself.

Re: CEOs’ pay climbed before layoffs at tech giants like Alphabet and Microsoft

#308

Post by empyrrhicist »

scyzoryk_xyz wrote: post #114
whitepaint wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Google is a $1.6T company. For a guy that runs it to earn $200 M a year is basically nothing. Can he do good enough of job? Great, he's then definitely worth it (and, actually, he's worth much more).

That “he runs” it is entirely made up as well. It’s a $1.6T company - one person doesn’t run the show. Is he worth more? Is he worth less? Literally all of this stuff is not anyone’s business outside of their company and their stakeholders. We can’t truly have a clue what doing a “good job” is with them, or what the compensation should be. They want to ruthlessly hire-fire talent - it’s all entirely on them as a comp…

> Literally all of this stuff is not anyone’s business outside of their company and their stakeholders.

Hard disagree - capitalism is great up to a point, but a functioning market and vibrant tech sector doesn't require that we allow individuals to become this obscenely wealthy. Answering the question of how extreme we want income/wealth inequality to be allowed to become is a valid economic question to be answered societally.

Re: CEOs’ pay climbed before layoffs at tech giants like Alphabet and Microsoft

#310

Post by Salgat »

whimsicalism wrote: post #59
Salgat wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Exactly. It's more accurate to say "we look at long term as long as the short term stock price also looks good".

Do you all not understand that the stock price reflects the long term prospects of the company? It’s literally priced in

That's only for very broad things; as long as there's no red flags, short term takes priority.
Post reply on HN