As a senior manager in engineering for many years in big techs (e.g., Microsoft $Microsoft(MSFT)$ and Facebook $Meta Platforms, Inc.(META)$), I have hired dozens of tech ICs and many managers. Many of them have been from Amazon $Amazon.com(AMZN)$ or had Amazon experience. The best people I've hired have left Amazon due to one or more common issues, 1) Amazon is cheap in taking care of its employees, 2) The vesting schedule comparatively terrible, 3) the base is very low, especially for people living in expensive areas like the Bay Area, Seattle, NY, etc.

Naively it may seem better to keep the base low, keep the crap vesting schedule, and reduce RSUs, but you have to keep in mind that doing that is the fastest way to lose great employees. Top tech workers are highly mobile and they know it. It's very common to have offers from multiple big techs at the same time. If you're a high performer, why would you choose Amazon over Google, Apple, Meta, etc.?

Aside from the argument about dilution (which is misinformed), the path you are advocating may reap short-term gains but come at a hefty long-term cost. As an investor I want my stock to perform for the next 10-20 years, not get a small bump for a couple years then struggle for the next decade.