[dead]
CEOs’ pay climbed before layoffs at tech giants like Alphabet and Microsoft
61–70 of 357 posts
Re: CEOs’ pay climbed before layoffs at tech giants like Alphabet and Microsoft
#62This isn't really a surprise. We've created a society that depends on growth. CEOs sign up for a job where they're responsible for growing a company, so they're obviously the type to value growth and want more for themsleves too – there's not a lot of CEOs who do it out of the goodness of their hearts. The investors, from the board down to individual nameless shareholders, all demand more money every quarter... even…
I don't think this is true for all of us, possibly not even for most people in the US. I know plenty of people who took lower paying jobs because they valued other things more than "growth": quality of life, family, passion, etc. I know people who have enough to meet their needs and are not actively working towards having more . People who retire by "aging in place" who do not care about the value of their home becau…
I think this is somewhat naive. The growth mindset pervades the entire economy, and virtually everyone's interests are bound into it one way or another.
Yes, of course there are people who prioritize lifestyle over chasing money. No one will debate that. But if those people's retirement plans are dependent on a 401k or drawing payments from a pension fund and not just cash savings, then they are amongst the growth-obsessed shareholders, whether they realize it or not.
Re: CEOs’ pay climbed before layoffs at tech giants like Alphabet and Microsoft
#63I know for a fact that people in the Csuite of medium size companies can easily make 400k/month total comp (specifically if they’re public companies, but private companies have outrageous paychecks also). Not even talking about the CEO, and not even talking about FAANGs and similar companies. Chances are that the leadership team of your company is making an absurd amount of money.
That’s $5m/y.
Nick Clegg makes not much more for being Facebook’s global punching bag.
Not doubting your sources but why are they so generous?
Re: CEOs’ pay climbed before layoffs at tech giants like Alphabet and Microsoft
#64I am extremely skeptical that at the higher levels of CEO pay there is any marginal utility. I just don’t think the improved management quality you get from an additional $1M is actually making the company more than $1M in profits. Seems like a failure of markets
That might be true if the goal were to maximize the profits and long-term health of companies to deliver value to society. It's more as though the goal is to maximize shareholder wealth and minimize the dependence on expensive employees by encouraging a bitter atmosphere that in turn results in high turnover, which is in turn good for profits because it uses up the best 5-10 years of a young person's life in generating new ideas before they wake up and realize that they are not in any way contributing to the good of society.
Re: CEOs’ pay climbed before layoffs at tech giants like Alphabet and Microsoft
#65Earlier quoted context omitted.
I don't think this is true for all of us, possibly not even for most people in the US. I know plenty of people who took lower paying jobs because they valued other things more than "growth": quality of life, family, passion, etc. I know people who have enough to meet their needs and are not actively working towards having more . People who retire by "aging in place" who do not care about the value of their home becau…
I think this is somewhat naive. The growth mindset pervades the entire economy, and virtually everyone's interests are bound into it one way or another. Yes, of course there are people who prioritize lifestyle over chasing money. No one will debate that. But if those people's retirement plans are dependent on a 401k or drawing payments from a pension fund and not just cash savings, then they are amongst the growth-ob…
Yup, this was the point I was trying to make, and you made it much better.
I think 99.9% of people have good intentions. But so much of everything we do depends on growth without us even realizing it.
Re: CEOs’ pay climbed before layoffs at tech giants like Alphabet and Microsoft
#66> Alphabet CEO Sundar Pichai was awarded compensation worth more than $225 million in 2022 I know this has been discussed here and 225MM is like the salary of 1000 employees making 200K for only one year, it is stock which is volatoile, that the salary of a CEO is impossible to measure, bla bla bla. But holy guacamole, whatever is the angle I look at it 225MM pear year does not make any f_ing sense to me and it is si…
Just to be fair, for 90% of the world, the kinds of compensation many hacker news readers have (a Silicon Valley engineer who gets a high base plus bonus plus equity) would also be considered “holy guacamole, whatever is the angle I look at it … does not make any f_ing sense”
Re: CEOs’ pay climbed before layoffs at tech giants like Alphabet and Microsoft
#67Earlier quoted context omitted.
You can't move countries to avoid capital gains.
What often happens is that corporation in high tax country has subsidiary in low tax country that they find a way to funnel profits too. Not sure on details myself. It has to be done just right. I believe Ireland and the Netherlands are often host countries. Now this is different than money laundering, which is big time illegal, of course.
> What often happens is that corporation in high tax country has subsidiary in low tax country that they find a way to funnel profits too.
That has nothing to do with individual taxes.
Re: CEOs’ pay climbed before layoffs at tech giants like Alphabet and Microsoft
#68This isn't really a surprise. We've created a society that depends on growth. CEOs sign up for a job where they're responsible for growing a company, so they're obviously the type to value growth and want more for themsleves too – there's not a lot of CEOs who do it out of the goodness of their hearts. The investors, from the board down to individual nameless shareholders, all demand more money every quarter... even…
"Growth for the sake of growth is the ideology of the cancer cell." ~ Edward Abbey
What irks me is lots of products are "done" but continue to receive pointless changes - whether that be UX changes, half-backed features, or regressions in functionality. And for what? So the marketing department has something to market, so engineers can justify their continued employment?
This problem isn't limited to the business world either. Even in the open source community there is a tendency to assume that if a project isn't receiving regular code changes, then it must be "dead" or "unsupported" when in actuality it _might_ be a sign the project is mature and stable.
Re: CEOs’ pay climbed before layoffs at tech giants like Alphabet and Microsoft
#69Earlier quoted context omitted.
I don't think this is true for all of us, possibly not even for most people in the US. I know plenty of people who took lower paying jobs because they valued other things more than "growth": quality of life, family, passion, etc. I know people who have enough to meet their needs and are not actively working towards having more . People who retire by "aging in place" who do not care about the value of their home becau…
I think this is somewhat naive. The growth mindset pervades the entire economy, and virtually everyone's interests are bound into it one way or another. Yes, of course there are people who prioritize lifestyle over chasing money. No one will debate that. But if those people's retirement plans are dependent on a 401k or drawing payments from a pension fund and not just cash savings, then they are amongst the growth-ob…
[dead]
Re: CEOs’ pay climbed before layoffs at tech giants like Alphabet and Microsoft
#70> Alphabet CEO Sundar Pichai was awarded compensation worth more than $225 million in 2022 I know this has been discussed here and 225MM is like the salary of 1000 employees making 200K for only one year, it is stock which is volatoile, that the salary of a CEO is impossible to measure, bla bla bla. But holy guacamole, whatever is the angle I look at it 225MM pear year does not make any f_ing sense to me and it is si…
To be clear, it's an accounting artifact, NOT what he actually makes per year -- as the rest of the sentence might clue the reader into:
> which marked a staggering 3,474% increase from the previous year
For whatever reason, Google pays their CEO using a "triennial" stock award. It vests over 3 years.
So just to be accurate, his yearly compensation is more like $75 MM. Still obviously a lot of money for anyone, but now a number that actually makes sense to compare with other CEO's.