undefined | Better HN

0 pointsHWR_144y ago0 comments

Government issued bonds are the antithesis of high-risk, high-reward. And I don't see any reason why you wouldn't just use whatever salaries make sense. Google et al use RSUs for vesting purposes, but aside from tradition (and tax benefits) they could just issue a cash amount.

In a smaller company, the stock may appreciate due to your actions, but there's absolutely no reason to think most employees would do anything that moves Google's stock price. And even less to think anyone would do anything that would impact US government tax receipts.

Working for Google and getting RSUs isn't really higher-risk, higher reward compared to a salary.

0 comments

2 comments · 1 top-level

Tabular-Iceberg4y ago· 1 in thread

> Government issued bonds are the antithesis of high-risk, high-reward.

That’s exactly what I said, that they need to come up with a higher-risk, higher-reward instrument because bonds aren’t high risk, high reward enough to act as an incentive. Your problem clearly isn’t that the subject matter calls for insulting or dismissing, it’s that you decided in advance to act insulting and dismissive regardless of what the response may be.

The government makes the rules in the first place, I’m sure they can figure something out. At least I object to the claim that it’s obvious that they can’t.

HWR_14OP4y ago

> said, that they need to come up with a higher-risk, higher-reward instrument

Why bother doing that when they can give you money and you can invest it in lottery tickets, beanie babies, bonds or Google yourself?

Except in the event of a startup, where you don't have the ability to buy in yourself to such a high-risk, high-reward outcome yourself.

But there isn't be much difference between Google offering you RSUs and just more salary (assuming the 'more salary' also vested)

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse