Google's ex-CEO gets $101M pay package in new job

Yahoo News : Google Inc. awarded Schmidt a compensation package valued at $101 million last year, according to a Friday regulatory filing. The amount is 322 times higher than the $313,219 package that Schmidt received in 2010 during his final full year as the Internet search leader's CEO.

Read Full Story >>
The story is too old to be commented.
thereapersson2368d ago

If I even got ONE million, I'd be set for a long time.

A guy can dream...

zeddy2368d ago

101 million? thats absurd! whats he going to do with all that? whats wrong with 10 million or 5 million? just imagine how many people they could hire for work with all that money. but nope lets give it all to one dude who already has a shit load of money.

SephirothX212368d ago (Edited 2368d ago )

And what do you think he'll do with that money? Burn it? He'll invest in companies that employ people. He'll spend it on materials made by companies that employ people. He'll put it in banks that will use it to lend money to companies who employ people. Think for a second.

kaveti66162368d ago

You're making a false assumption that all of his money will be liquid.

Rich people diversify their wealth into both liquid and non-liquid assets.

The economy is faltering because money is circulating into the wrong areas. You're arguing in favor of the "Trickle Down" effect.

Money is like blood. It needs to circulate into the right places at the right speed. When a lot of money is given to a very small amount of people, it doesn't circulate well. They use it to buy expensive luxury items, and none of that helps regular people.

Rich people are the blood cots of society. They hire people to come up with BS philosophies and BS economic systems to rationalize their existence.

People like you say, "Don't punish our job creators."

Well, in that case, don't punish the guy who throws a brick through a window, because obviously his behavior has employed someone. Someone now has the job of replacing that window.

Don't punish the criminals because they employ the police. Don't punish arsonists because they employ firefighters.

Schmidt is just another clot.

SephirothX212364d ago (Edited 2364d ago )

If a window was broken, then the effort put in to making that window has been wasted. Also, it would cause distress to someone in the short term and I don't see how anyone could earn the right to break a window unless it was their property. Therefore that is a ridiculous analogy. You think all academics studying economics that have helped formulate the theories on supply and demand are simply doing so to please the wealthy? How could the resources used to create a luxury car be used elsewhere to help "regular people"? Do you think Google would just pay the guy this money without adequately valuing his contribution first? They have shareholders to please. You believe then that the amount paid to anyone should be clamped to some maximum amount? Describe to me then a system that would have money circulate into the "right" areas? What incentives would there be for people to even better themselves or to work for promotion if there is no reward?