Just because someone is paid a lot doesn't mean they're not under-compensated. Remember the sports team strikes? They were making lots of money before but they felt they weren't getting enough of the value they created so they did a strike and proved it.

Wages are (very purposely) not an efficient market so a group making more than most doing the same kind of work does not mean said group is overcompensated. It could be that the entire group is under-compensated, some of them just less so.

I think he is thinking in terms of shares of the company, not salary. Salaries in the Bay are obviously higher than anywhere else, but what people want is to become millionaires when the company they work for sells to a bigger company.

Doesn't everyone want to become millionaires though?

Seriously, discussions like this just show how out of touch sometimes this crowd is like.

Relative to the value we add? Absolutely. The under-compensation is even worse elsewhere.

If software developers add so much value they should start their own business. Then they'll see how valuable sales and marketing is

relative to demand and cost of living potentially