is # of layoffs a misleading metric?
if the workforce is always increasing in size, doesn't the number of layoffs each quarter have to go up?
The U.S. just had the most Q1 layoffs in a decade
71–80 of 243 posts
Re: The U.S. just had the most Q1 layoffs in a decade
#72Earlier quoted context omitted.
Bully: Give me $5 today. Bully: Give me $5 today. Bully: Give me $5 today. Bully: Give me $4 today. You: That bully just GAVE his victim $1.
The concept that the government is a bully makes me laugh (and also sad). What a warped worldview.
Chomsky's comments on this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gsUJGwZcVVU
Re: The U.S. just had the most Q1 layoffs in a decade
#73How many of these jobs are full-time versus part time? It's ridiculous that the only numbers reported on are these aggregate stats, when we live in a time where many people cannot make ends meet working two or more part-time jobs.
Re: The U.S. just had the most Q1 layoffs in a decade
#74Earlier quoted context omitted.
I have a theory (it's a totally unproven one, I hasten to add). There's been a huge move into passively managed index funds over the last 10 years, with many smart investors touting them as a better long term bet than actively managed funds. Passively managed funds don't look at what's coming down the road, they invest to fixed formula. So where an active fund might predict a fall and get out of equities, all the pas…
I invest in index funds that follow the S&P 500 according to a formula. The data shows that they tend to outperform managed funds in the long term. With so many people following the same strategy it will be interesting to see if that stays true long term, but the problem is the same as it ever was. How do you identify an active fund manager that will outperform the market over a long time period? Do they still outper…
Real life doesn't work like that.
Not everyone can put money into a magic ETF that guarentees returns. The passive index funds are piggy backing off the work of active investors.
Thought experiment: If everyone put money into an index fund that guarantees returns, what is the difference between that and a Ponzi scheme?
Re: The U.S. just had the most Q1 layoffs in a decade
#75Earlier quoted context omitted.
Layoffs plus hiring. Will people realize at some point that volatility is a sign of health?
> volatility is a sign of health Say that to the workers that got laid off, lost earnings and perhaps even the health insurance their family depends on.
In defence of OP, it can be a sign of health for the country but devastating to an individual.
Re: The U.S. just had the most Q1 layoffs in a decade
#76I wonder if this is a net loss or a gross loss; I would love to compare this article with another detailing the amount of hires in the same period
Re: The U.S. just had the most Q1 layoffs in a decade
#77"The report said worry about an economic slowdown was the main driver of companies' layoff intentions." I sometimes wonder if these sorts of economic projections end up being self-fulfilling prophecies. If everyone tightens up spending because they expect a recession, that essentially guarantees there will be one.
"The report said worry about an economic slowdown was the main driver of companies' layoff intentions." Has anyone seen this happen in practice? Any HNer who is management have to lay people off because their executives say “we have no problem getting capital right now but we think it might become more difficult in the future.”
Not really. The only time I saw something like this was as a contractor at a certain Fortune 500 company. As each fiscal year was approaching the end and budgets were running close, they'd quickly lay off all the contractors. They'd then be aggressively hiring contractors once they were in the new fiscal year.
I never quite understood that one. Feels like the churn would be more costly than keeping those contractors onboard for a month.
Re: The U.S. just had the most Q1 layoffs in a decade
#78> The impact: It's the highest number of job cuts in a quarter since 2015. Highest since 2015 is less surprising than “ highest in a decade”
Headline:> The U.S. just had the most Q1 layoffs in a decade Article:> The U.S. saw its highest level of layoffs in a first quarter since 2009 This seems like a reasonable headline for the article.
You can always find catchy headlines if you get specific enough.
"The worst performing Friday the 13th in a non leap year ever."
Re: The U.S. just had the most Q1 layoffs in a decade
#79"The report said worry about an economic slowdown was the main driver of companies' layoff intentions." I sometimes wonder if these sorts of economic projections end up being self-fulfilling prophecies. If everyone tightens up spending because they expect a recession, that essentially guarantees there will be one.
Countries that implement "austerity measures" often find themselves in this sort of cycle too. In most countries the government is a significant employer and its spending a significant portion of GDP. Significantly cutting that is going to have a negative impact.
Re: The U.S. just had the most Q1 layoffs in a decade
#80Earlier quoted context omitted.
Bully: Give me $5 today. Bully: Give me $5 today. Bully: Give me $5 today. Bully: Give me $4 today. You: That bully just GAVE his victim $1.
The concept that the government is a bully makes me laugh (and also sad). What a warped worldview.
It could be an apple vendor who lowers their price, same difference here. The label doesn't matter.
But here in the US, they definitely act like a bully eager to punish people for earning money because half the country views wealth as a sin. They do it to the extent of coming up with absurd new tax schemes.
> Sen. Ron Wyden, D-Oregon, announced on Tuesday that he is working on a mark-to-market system that would tax unrealized capital gains on assets owned by “millionaires and billionaires.”