The fact is — everyone should be paid more; we need a society where wealth is merely captured by but a relative few individuals.
In a sense, however, the way Googlers are paid is not quite right; Google itself is a microcosm for income disparity with respect to ICs versus executives; and Google outside of itself is a microcosm for wealth capture disparity among firms in the country — it almost certainly holds an unfair monopoly at this point.
This article seems to be about inciting class warfare without considering facts. I can't afford to live where I grew up, a barely middle-class area, without making $400k/year. Something is very wrong if most Googlers can't afford that and there are a smaller subset of people with extreme wealth being created or moving in who caused absurd gentrification.
> One has to wonder what Googlers, if surveyed again, really think "fair and equitable" pay is.
It's written as a rabble-rousing op-ed piece.
It could be they're genuinely outraged (after all, this is someone on journalist compensation, looking at Leetcode performance artist TC), or they could just be going for clicks, or they could be doing a hit piece on Google PR, or they could be helping Google to suppress compensation.
IMHO, there are much better things to criticize Google over, than that they pay well. Especially some of the company behaviors that enable paying high TC. BI's full disclosure on the article says their company is suing over some company behaviors.
Title shortened due to length restrictions. Original title was, “The highest-earning Googlers are so well paid it would take decades for ordinary people to catch up — but some of them say they should earn more.”
Sadly the reverse is definitely true: supporting Palestinians is supporting the "defenders" of Palestine, Hamas. Acting like Hamas doesn't exist when there are fights, with constant accusations Israel is just wasting rockets bullets on Palestinian kids and cats, just because they're evil. Reminds me of a certain Marxist book about "Elders of Zion" from long ago, I must say. And of course, if Israeli soldiers get killed in those fights, suddenly it's Hamas' doing and we celebrate (on social media, at least Western press is, for now, mostly abstaining from celebrating Hamas killings, although the same cannot be said for Arab and some leftist publications. And yes, sorry, it really is leftist publications).
I do believe this counts as a leftist publication. It celebrates a few Hamas victories and actually proposes military support for Hamas.
Then, again, Hamas doesn't exist and we don't discuss "them-who-must-not-be-named". It's childish, superficial, dumb and transparent.
And mentioning that there seems to be a problem: the "defenders" of Palestine ... don't defend Palestine. And, Hamas actively attacks Palestinians, that's heresy. Despite it being the obvious truth.
I mean, we can have a serious conversation about the morality of this situation, and we should, but not with this sort of attitude. Hamas exists, uses Palestinians, and Palestinian kids not just as cannon fodder, but as actual weapons of war.
There's a good number of googlers that understand the system is a game. They always vote that they want more even if they believe they are being paid more than most.
In a sense, however, the way Googlers are paid is not quite right; Google itself is a microcosm for income disparity with respect to ICs versus executives; and Google outside of itself is a microcosm for wealth capture disparity among firms in the country — it almost certainly holds an unfair monopoly at this point.