You are basing your logic on conflicting assumptions. First you say that you need "a very generous CEO" to raise salaries as revenues increase, but that isn't

You are basing your logic on conflicting assumptions. First you say that you need "a very generous CEO" to raise salaries as revenues increase, but that isn't just a requirement to get a raise. That is also a requirement to get hired at a higher than market rate. Why would Google hire a developer in the Bay Area when they can have 3 in Akron or a whole team in India? Why are you assuming that just because Google has "high salaries baked into every assumption and model" that they won't go "tweaking these other numbers" as soon as "projections show that some target isn't going to be met"? Paying everyone the same regardless of their location means that people in the highest cost areas need to compete on salary with people in the lowest cost areas. People in the low cost locations outnumber people in the high cost areas so it will be a race to the bottom. Google isn't going to pay everyone Bay Area salaries. They will pay everyone as little as possible to still reach their target headcount/production.