> Saying they spurned Google...the majority of the substitute employers are already in China.

There is life outside of the FAANG/GAFAM bubble. If you refuse to work at Google, it doesn't mean that you're then obligated to work at Amazon or Microsoft, etc.

Of course there is, but when considering substitute employers, in the economic sense, working in a small-town software shop isn't quite the same as working at a multinational tech company.

If we're looking at it in that lens, then GP's problem isn't with Google, but with large tech companies in general because that's the industry standard.

> Of course there is, but when considering substitute employers, in the economic sense, working in a small-town software shop isn't quite the same as working at a multinational tech company.

The life outside of the FAANG/GAFAM bubble isn't just "small-town software shop[s]." There's a lot more diversity than that, and to conceive of the industry in that way is too parochial.

How many of those companies can be considered substitute employers to Google? That offer the same level of compensation?

That is what an economic substitute is. SMB tech companies typically don't compare.

You're saying his moral position is invalid because he doesn't apply it consistently, and that is not true, and also possibly harmful.

I said the moral position is disingenuous because it is both inconsistent and opposite to what he is describing, when considering all things related.

But each "related" decision is different, and there is no accurate generalization, by the very nature of what a generalization is.