So Eric Schmidt would pay some pennies? (Since he is paid $1 a year :) )
Of course very rich guys have their workarounds anyway, for example I recall reading that Ingvar Kamprad pays himself avg IKEA worker salary. Still better than those ridiculous $1 salaries of SV execs.
The great swedish furniture company is actually a dutch charity.
IKEA itself - not the owner - is a charity, registered in Holland to be in the Eu but actually in the Dutch antilles so they don't pay Dutch tax and they can keep secret any donations
but I think there needs to be more optimal solution than just equity compensation or just cash-salary compensation.
"Legal" is used here to mean "would stand up in a court of law in the relevant jurisdiction."
Suppose a professional gambler made exactly the same amount as Eric Schmidt per year. This "system" would fine them equally. But the gambler relies on his bankroll as his asset, whereas Schmidt relies on his reputation and personal network.
How can you make this fair?
2) Everyone has a different definition of "fair." Which one are you using?
I merely point out a major caveat.
(2) From the article: "In reality, fairness is not so much about the actual distribution of loot as it is about the psychology of how you feel about it."