5 ms·

Elon Musk Is Overpaid

28 points by feross 3y ago

morphicpro 3y ago
Go work a week as a landscaper and then let's talk about programmer salaries. Anyone sitting on their ass making over 100k a year is overpaid IMO. Unless you are curing caner lets be honest you are just making the next fart app and no you don't deserve more money than people breaking their back to make your garden look nice.
- nathancahill 3y ago
  Grandma? Didn't know you had an HN account.
  - bnegativ3 3y ago
    [dead]
- FooBarBizBazz 3y ago
  This is like that exercise where people make a scale model of the solar system using a bowling ball for the Sun and a peppercorn for the Earth, and realize that, at that scale, the Earth is 77 feet away from the Sun, the Earth and Moon are only 2.5 inches apart, and Pluto is still half a mile away.
- realusername 3y ago
  It's not devs who are overpaid but everybody who is underpaid compared to the top. The current economy is a pyramid with honestly a lot of similarities with a ponzi scheme. I'm not saying outright that is one because I'm not sure myself but you could make a lot of parallels for sure. You are much closer to these lower paid jobs than you realize.
- onyxringer 3y ago
  Unlike some other replies, I kind of agree with a sentiment (maybe because I did a fair amount of physical labor), but one very important thing to realize is that salaries are not about "what's worth what" and fairness but about supply and demand. Developers get paid more because their productivity allows that and not a lot of people can do what they do. While almost anyone can be a landscaper. And supply and demand in inflexible markets leads either to runaway high or deep bottom price.
  - morphicpro 3y ago
    Supply and demand needs to go to hell and die in a fire. For example: Landlords who now own all the land thus control the supply and also inflate demand by reducing supply. Source: https://www.jchs.harvard.edu/sites/default/files/reports/files/Harvard_JCHS_Americas_Rental_Housing_2024.pdf https://www.jchs.harvard.edu/sites/default/files/reports/fil...
    - onyxringer 3y ago
      Supply and demand is what gives people incentives to do and produce what is most needed and conserve things that are scarce, for the benefit of everyone. Anytime anyone tried to get rid of them completely it ended in poverty and misery, not a more just system. Having said that, I sympathize with arguments to nudge things toward more just/equal outcomes recognizing supply&demand can be quite inhumane - after all it's a mechanism, not a goal in itself. Some UBI etc. could be an efficient way to help. Having said that, western world spends huge amounts of money on public education for everyone, and after all that lots of people can't do anything fancier than tiding up a garden. It's a huge waste of resources. Future manual labor workers could start working after quick and efficient elementary schools, and start building wealth sooner to offset their lower productivity. But boy, no one is going to have conversations like that. On all sides of all debates there's just bunch of irrational people trying to tweak a system that is too complex for them to understand.
    - deleted 3y ago
      [deleted]
- reducesuffering 3y ago
  Supply and demand. I'll work for a week as a landscaper. The landscaper will work for a week as a software engineer. Who do you think will fare better at getting close to a decent job well done?
  - morphicpro 3y ago
    If you don't think people who are physically fit as a requirement to do their job can't think on their own, Well I got news for you once you assume people who generally sit all day and think can inherently have the physical requirement to do manual labor. Most programmers could not probably finish a real days labor job on their feet for 8 hours. They got a standing desk just to try 6 most of the time.
    - reducesuffering 3y ago
      I respect landscaping as a profession but idk what reality you're in that you think a software engineer job is just being able to "think on your own" in a way that even 1% of landscapers can be plopped into it productively immediately. Of course people who sit all day like many engineers will have problems doing manual labor. The problem is a good amount of them have enough experience with their hands to be a landscaper on demand. You will not find any but the most Einstein level landscapers able to immediately do productive software engineer work. The % of people able to do it is much lower in software engineering and that reflects its compensation compared to landscaping.
- greyw 3y ago
  Doing physical labor for a living is a deadend. I luckily learned this early enough in my life.
  - morphicpro 3y ago
    Sitting at a desk is like a 2 packs of smokes a day.
    - greyw 3y ago
      Then I don't even want to know how many packs back breaking manual labor corresponds to
- deleted 3y ago
  [deleted]
- croes 3y ago
  So because some are somewhat overpaid it's okay if Musk is multiple orders of a magnitude more overpaid? Strange logic. And even if, start changing from the top not the bottom or the middle
ado__dev 3y ago
From everything I've read and learned about this Musk comp drama, it has nothing to do with how much he's getting paid and everything to do with how they created the comp package. The comp plan was presented as created by an independent board, when the truth was the directors had a direct conflict of interest that they did not disclose to the shareholders. And that under Delaware law makes it a no-no and allows shareholders to sue, which they did. They were "mislead." Had they been more transparent, they could have given Musk triple the comp package and everything would have been above board. The issue at the end of the day is transparency to shareholders, not the $ amount, or whether he did or did not earn it.
- gitfan86 3y ago
  Which is why people are talking about moving companies out of Delaware. Why would an executive want to work at a company if after he achieves amazing results, his compensation can Ben clawed back, due to a missing one sentence disclaimer on a proxy statement?
  - vrc 3y ago
    Uhhh, when the deal is for a $55bn package, an executive should pay a lawyer to make sure that that sentence is included, and ideally that it’s truthful if included. Delaware is the most shareholder friendly state for business and has so much clear precedence it makes operating a business easy. If you fail at that basic level of governance, it is either idiocy or malfeasance. Can’t have it both ways. Also, nobody serious is talking about moving companies out of Delaware. Elon is tweeting about it.
  - ado__dev 3y ago
    I actually see this as a strong reason to stay. Again the issue isn't compensation and whether it was too much, it's that the shareholders were mislead. If the board had disclosed they had a conflict of interest, and the shareholders still voted for the package (which I believe they still would have), it would be a moot point, but they did not. They didn't follow the rules, and that has consequences. Laws and contracts aren't worth the paper they're written on if they're not enforced, and failure to follow the law, which they were all aware of, has consequences.
duckman1 3y ago
Oh no my hero is suffering. Anyways.
- worksonmine 3y ago
  I bet he once was your hero and you praised him. Until you realized he had opinions you didn't share so now it's your part time job to make sure everyone knows exactly how much you hate him. Am I close?
  - hbarka 3y ago
    At what point is “he had opinions” turn to “ugh this guy does awful things”?
    - worksonmine 3y ago
      He always made gambles. But electric cars and space travel was cool, breaking up a safe space not so much apparently. I still remember the hipsters spinning their fidget spinners, swiping their iphones and discussing Musks latest endeavour like it was yesterday. Granted I don't follow his every move so I'm out of the loop, but what objectively awful things has he done? I have plenty of opinions about many people, but none to the point we see some people hate Musk. Edit: instead of downvoting, argue your points cowards.
      - hbarka 3y ago
        Where have you been? 1. “He admitted to his biographer that the reason the Hyperloop was announced—even though he had no intention of pursuing it—was to try to disrupt the California high-speed rail project”. (In hindsight Hyperloop looks like a sick joke.) 2. Buying SolarCity to save first-cousin, at loss to Tesla shareholder value and broken commitments to solar customers. Staged it as value-added move. 3. Taking-Tesla-Private impulsive outburst. Turned out to be untrue, billions in shareholder value lost overnight. 4. Full Self Driving ten years of promises and customers who prepaid not refunded. 5. Outright malice to innocents who challenged his ego. See British explorer pedo comment and trashing of that guy. 6. His son/his dad 7. Battery capacity hyping More… The pattern has to do with integrity and character as an example for such a wealthy and revered person.
ZeroGravitas 3y ago
You know how it's a meme that Tesla scores low on ESG, while Exxon or Shell or whatever scores high? G for Governance covers this. > What happened when the rating agencies looked at Tesla? Tesla has faced accusations of racism and poor working conditions, especially in the California plant. They looked at executive pay, they looked at their internal controls. And Tesla historically, has faced, you know, a lot of governance issues.
mamonster 3y ago
This is unironically also the perfect exit opportunity for Musk to exit Tesla at the top whilst still having the ability to raise capital from his fanboys for his next bets. Simply say that he now does not have enough control over Tesla, so it doesn't make sense for him to keep running it. But guess what? SpaceX is doing pretty well, so if Musk was 100% committed to SpaceX(and 100% committed to X, so 200% committed in total,) he could build a new Tesla from SpaceX. Instead of promises of Tsla robots folding clothes he could now promise SpaceX robots mining asteroids.
- deleted 3y ago
  [deleted]
DoubleDerper 3y ago
Musk the worlds most hyped "capital allocator", a phrased increasingly parroted by billionaires and aspiring VC-bros as their raison d'etre to excuse bad behavior.
HermitX 3y ago
Whether you acknowledge it or not, in the journey of human progress, some individuals have played roles far greater than others. If our goal is to advance the progress of humanity as a whole, then rewarding these individuals is usually justified. Personally, I believe that Musk is greater than Buffett.
ioblomov 3y ago
https://archive.ph/XMmoF https://archive.ph/XMmoF

28 points by feross 3y ago

Go work a week as a landscaper and then let's talk about programmer salaries. Anyone sitting on their ass making over 100k a year is overpaid IMO. Unless you are curing caner lets be honest you are just making the next fart app and no you don't deserve more money than people breaking their back to make your garden look nice.

nathancahill 3y ago
Grandma? Didn't know you had an HN account.
- bnegativ3 3y ago
  [dead]
FooBarBizBazz 3y ago
This is like that exercise where people make a scale model of the solar system using a bowling ball for the Sun and a peppercorn for the Earth, and realize that, at that scale, the Earth is 77 feet away from the Sun, the Earth and Moon are only 2.5 inches apart, and Pluto is still half a mile away.
realusername 3y ago
It's not devs who are overpaid but everybody who is underpaid compared to the top. The current economy is a pyramid with honestly a lot of similarities with a ponzi scheme. I'm not saying outright that is one because I'm not sure myself but you could make a lot of parallels for sure. You are much closer to these lower paid jobs than you realize.
onyxringer 3y ago
Unlike some other replies, I kind of agree with a sentiment (maybe because I did a fair amount of physical labor), but one very important thing to realize is that salaries are not about "what's worth what" and fairness but about supply and demand. Developers get paid more because their productivity allows that and not a lot of people can do what they do. While almost anyone can be a landscaper. And supply and demand in inflexible markets leads either to runaway high or deep bottom price.
- morphicpro 3y ago
  Supply and demand needs to go to hell and die in a fire. For example: Landlords who now own all the land thus control the supply and also inflate demand by reducing supply. Source: https://www.jchs.harvard.edu/sites/default/files/reports/files/Harvard_JCHS_Americas_Rental_Housing_2024.pdf https://www.jchs.harvard.edu/sites/default/files/reports/fil...
  - onyxringer 3y ago
    Supply and demand is what gives people incentives to do and produce what is most needed and conserve things that are scarce, for the benefit of everyone. Anytime anyone tried to get rid of them completely it ended in poverty and misery, not a more just system. Having said that, I sympathize with arguments to nudge things toward more just/equal outcomes recognizing supply&demand can be quite inhumane - after all it's a mechanism, not a goal in itself. Some UBI etc. could be an efficient way to help. Having said that, western world spends huge amounts of money on public education for everyone, and after all that lots of people can't do anything fancier than tiding up a garden. It's a huge waste of resources. Future manual labor workers could start working after quick and efficient elementary schools, and start building wealth sooner to offset their lower productivity. But boy, no one is going to have conversations like that. On all sides of all debates there's just bunch of irrational people trying to tweak a system that is too complex for them to understand.
  - deleted 3y ago
    [deleted]
reducesuffering 3y ago
Supply and demand. I'll work for a week as a landscaper. The landscaper will work for a week as a software engineer. Who do you think will fare better at getting close to a decent job well done?
- morphicpro 3y ago
  If you don't think people who are physically fit as a requirement to do their job can't think on their own, Well I got news for you once you assume people who generally sit all day and think can inherently have the physical requirement to do manual labor. Most programmers could not probably finish a real days labor job on their feet for 8 hours. They got a standing desk just to try 6 most of the time.
  - reducesuffering 3y ago
    I respect landscaping as a profession but idk what reality you're in that you think a software engineer job is just being able to "think on your own" in a way that even 1% of landscapers can be plopped into it productively immediately. Of course people who sit all day like many engineers will have problems doing manual labor. The problem is a good amount of them have enough experience with their hands to be a landscaper on demand. You will not find any but the most Einstein level landscapers able to immediately do productive software engineer work. The % of people able to do it is much lower in software engineering and that reflects its compensation compared to landscaping.
greyw 3y ago
Doing physical labor for a living is a deadend. I luckily learned this early enough in my life.
- morphicpro 3y ago
  Sitting at a desk is like a 2 packs of smokes a day.
  - greyw 3y ago
    Then I don't even want to know how many packs back breaking manual labor corresponds to
deleted 3y ago
[deleted]
croes 3y ago
So because some are somewhat overpaid it's okay if Musk is multiple orders of a magnitude more overpaid? Strange logic. And even if, start changing from the top not the bottom or the middle

ado__dev 3y ago

From everything I've read and learned about this Musk comp drama, it has nothing to do with how much he's getting paid and everything to do with how they created the comp package. The comp plan was presented as created by an independent board, when the truth was the directors had a direct conflict of interest that they did not disclose to the shareholders. And that under Delaware law makes it a no-no and allows shareholders to sue, which they did. They were "mislead." Had they been more transparent, they could have given Musk triple the comp package and everything would have been above board. The issue at the end of the day is transparency to shareholders, not the $ amount, or whether he did or did not earn it.

gitfan86 3y ago
Which is why people are talking about moving companies out of Delaware. Why would an executive want to work at a company if after he achieves amazing results, his compensation can Ben clawed back, due to a missing one sentence disclaimer on a proxy statement?
- vrc 3y ago
  Uhhh, when the deal is for a $55bn package, an executive should pay a lawyer to make sure that that sentence is included, and ideally that it’s truthful if included. Delaware is the most shareholder friendly state for business and has so much clear precedence it makes operating a business easy. If you fail at that basic level of governance, it is either idiocy or malfeasance. Can’t have it both ways. Also, nobody serious is talking about moving companies out of Delaware. Elon is tweeting about it.
- ado__dev 3y ago
  I actually see this as a strong reason to stay. Again the issue isn't compensation and whether it was too much, it's that the shareholders were mislead. If the board had disclosed they had a conflict of interest, and the shareholders still voted for the package (which I believe they still would have), it would be a moot point, but they did not. They didn't follow the rules, and that has consequences. Laws and contracts aren't worth the paper they're written on if they're not enforced, and failure to follow the law, which they were all aware of, has consequences.

duckman1 3y ago

Oh no my hero is suffering. Anyways.

worksonmine 3y ago
I bet he once was your hero and you praised him. Until you realized he had opinions you didn't share so now it's your part time job to make sure everyone knows exactly how much you hate him. Am I close?
- hbarka 3y ago
  At what point is “he had opinions” turn to “ugh this guy does awful things”?
  - worksonmine 3y ago
    He always made gambles. But electric cars and space travel was cool, breaking up a safe space not so much apparently. I still remember the hipsters spinning their fidget spinners, swiping their iphones and discussing Musks latest endeavour like it was yesterday. Granted I don't follow his every move so I'm out of the loop, but what objectively awful things has he done? I have plenty of opinions about many people, but none to the point we see some people hate Musk. Edit: instead of downvoting, argue your points cowards.
    - hbarka 3y ago
      Where have you been? 1. “He admitted to his biographer that the reason the Hyperloop was announced—even though he had no intention of pursuing it—was to try to disrupt the California high-speed rail project”. (In hindsight Hyperloop looks like a sick joke.) 2. Buying SolarCity to save first-cousin, at loss to Tesla shareholder value and broken commitments to solar customers. Staged it as value-added move. 3. Taking-Tesla-Private impulsive outburst. Turned out to be untrue, billions in shareholder value lost overnight. 4. Full Self Driving ten years of promises and customers who prepaid not refunded. 5. Outright malice to innocents who challenged his ego. See British explorer pedo comment and trashing of that guy. 6. His son/his dad 7. Battery capacity hyping More… The pattern has to do with integrity and character as an example for such a wealthy and revered person.

ZeroGravitas 3y ago

You know how it's a meme that Tesla scores low on ESG, while Exxon or Shell or whatever scores high? G for Governance covers this. > What happened when the rating agencies looked at Tesla? Tesla has faced accusations of racism and poor working conditions, especially in the California plant. They looked at executive pay, they looked at their internal controls. And Tesla historically, has faced, you know, a lot of governance issues.

mamonster 3y ago

This is unironically also the perfect exit opportunity for Musk to exit Tesla at the top whilst still having the ability to raise capital from his fanboys for his next bets. Simply say that he now does not have enough control over Tesla, so it doesn't make sense for him to keep running it. But guess what? SpaceX is doing pretty well, so if Musk was 100% committed to SpaceX(and 100% committed to X, so 200% committed in total,) he could build a new Tesla from SpaceX. Instead of promises of Tsla robots folding clothes he could now promise SpaceX robots mining asteroids.

deleted 3y ago
[deleted]

DoubleDerper 3y ago

Musk the worlds most hyped "capital allocator", a phrased increasingly parroted by billionaires and aspiring VC-bros as their raison d'etre to excuse bad behavior.

HermitX 3y ago

Whether you acknowledge it or not, in the journey of human progress, some individuals have played roles far greater than others. If our goal is to advance the progress of humanity as a whole, then rewarding these individuals is usually justified. Personally, I believe that Musk is greater than Buffett.

ioblomov 3y ago

https://archive.ph/XMmoF https://archive.ph/XMmoF