The U.S. just had the most Q1 layoffs in a decade • Hacker News Board

Re: The U.S. just had the most Q1 layoffs in a decade

#101

Post by CydeWeys » Fri, Apr 05, 2019, 5:14 PM UTC

mtw wrote: post #84

BluSyn wrote: post #2

"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.

It's not just projections or worries. Companies have real hard data, such as sales pipeline, inventories, orders etc. If your sales pipeline is down, inventory is stocking up, and your warehouse is idle compared to a year before, it is a manager's job to lay off employees. a few interesting reports: https://www.reddit.com/r/StockMarket/comments/aydpbu/first_h... https://twitter.com/paulkrugman/status/1110161228507348…

I think their point is that all of that hard data may be a result of self-fulfilling prophecies of other companies cutting back their business because there's a general sense that a recession might be coming.

Re: The U.S. just had the most Q1 layoffs in a decade

#102

Post by geggam » Fri, Apr 05, 2019, 5:15 PM UTC

geggam wrote: post #90

manfredo wrote: post #83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not really. The government has the authority to print money. They can ensure banks never run out of cash. But it may cause inflation if they overdo it. I suppose inflation is paying for it, but I get the feelings that the semantics around whether inflation is "paying" for things have changed recently (or maybe I've been hearing too many ardent MMT evangelists).

The ability to print money was outsourced to the Federal Reserve, while regulated by the govt it is not the govt. When we "borrow" money from the Fed it is at interest. We have created a debt based system where everything is a borrow. Fiat currencies are based on the value of the peoples ability to create value. When the people owe the banks more value than they can generate they are bankrupt. When the people and the…

BTW you downvoters who think the Federal Reserve is the govt should read a bit

https://www.federalreserve.gov/aboutthefed/section9.htm

Re: The U.S. just had the most Q1 layoffs in a decade

#103

Post by fiter » Fri, Apr 05, 2019, 5:15 PM UTC

mtw wrote: post #84

BluSyn wrote: post #2

"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.

It's not just projections or worries. Companies have real hard data, such as sales pipeline, inventories, orders etc. If your sales pipeline is down, inventory is stocking up, and your warehouse is idle compared to a year before, it is a manager's job to lay off employees. a few interesting reports: https://www.reddit.com/r/StockMarket/comments/aydpbu/first_h... https://twitter.com/paulkrugman/status/1110161228507348…

This could leave you flat-footed when the economy picks back up or you realize it was a 'blip', so it's not an easy/clear decision to make because you see one or two numbers going down.

Re: The U.S. just had the most Q1 layoffs in a decade

#104

Post by projektfu » Fri, Apr 05, 2019, 5:17 PM UTC

turtlecloud wrote: post #74

ishjoh wrote: post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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?

Simple. The fundamentals. If the guaranteed return is less than or equal to the earnings per share, then the game can continue indefinitely.

Index funds don't have gains because people keep believing the price will increase. They have them because the market as a whole gains in the long run. Index funds lose value during market downturns.

Anyhow, no index fund offers guaranteed returns. These days I only see that from crypto ponzis.

Re: The U.S. just had the most Q1 layoffs in a decade

#105

Post by airstrike » Fri, Apr 05, 2019, 5:17 PM UTC

empath75 wrote: post #100

pascalxus wrote: post #13

And yet, markets are nearly at all time highs. I'd like to see a breakdown of who's buying stocks/equities. EDIT: I know earnings are high, but much of our growth over the last 20 years has been during 2-4% GDP deficit. I don't think that's been priced into the markets. Markets may be assuming that the deficit party will continue.

The stock market was posting all time highs all the way up until a month before the 1929 crash that started the great depression.

That was also nearly 100 years ago, when the stock market was at its infancy. I question the relevancy of comparing to 1929

Re: The U.S. just had the most Q1 layoffs in a decade

#106

Post by Rooster61 » Fri, Apr 05, 2019, 5:18 PM UTC

SketchySeaBeast wrote: post #86

Rooster61 wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The stock market finds the 'correct' price for stocks, by aggregating conflicting beliefs and predictions of traders. 10-20 years ago, maybe. It's now driven largely by semi-autonomous algorithms monitoring swings/trends. I'd argue that it finds a 'simulated' price rather than a 'correct' price. The stock market is much less susceptible to emotional speculation than it used to be, for better or for worse. A quick g…

But won't these algorithms be based upon the whatever the meatspace traders were feeling? We've added indirection, but I don't know if it's in any way better.

Yes, but in a very different way, with a very different dynamic. While before, it was as OP said in that it's based on an aggregation of speculative sentiment from traders, it's now a pebble in pond ripple effect, where a panic of a few can trigger a runaway snowball effect MUCH faster than organic trading (algorithmic trading happens on the order of milliseconds).

Also, I didn't say it was better. IMO it's probably just as volatile/dangerous. It's just harder to predict as it's not as rooted in actual emotion/speculation.

Re: The U.S. just had the most Q1 layoffs in a decade

#107

Post by manfredo » Fri, Apr 05, 2019, 5:20 PM UTC

geggam wrote: post #90

manfredo wrote: post #83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not really. The government has the authority to print money. They can ensure banks never run out of cash. But it may cause inflation if they overdo it. I suppose inflation is paying for it, but I get the feelings that the semantics around whether inflation is "paying" for things have changed recently (or maybe I've been hearing too many ardent MMT evangelists).

The ability to print money was outsourced to the Federal Reserve, while regulated by the govt it is not the govt. When we "borrow" money from the Fed it is at interest. We have created a debt based system where everything is a borrow. Fiat currencies are based on the value of the peoples ability to create value. When the people owe the banks more value than they can generate they are bankrupt. When the people and the…

The federal reserve would print the money. They probably have an even bigger interest in preventing the collapse of America's financial institutions.

It's still a part is the government, just one with extra layers of separation from the executive. Like the FBI.

Re: The U.S. just had the most Q1 layoffs in a decade

#108

Post by TAForObvReasons » Fri, Apr 05, 2019, 5:20 PM UTC

learc83 wrote: post #78

tzs wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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."

This isn't a particularly contrived analysis. Year-over-year quarterly financial statistics are extremely common, especially in company analysis since many filings are quarterly.

Re: The U.S. just had the most Q1 layoffs in a decade

#109

Post by dgjrhgi » Fri, Apr 05, 2019, 5:20 PM UTC

Most of the job logs in retail sector is because of Amazon.

Re: The U.S. just had the most Q1 layoffs in a decade

#110

Post by gbear605 » Fri, Apr 05, 2019, 5:20 PM UTC

throw0101a wrote: post #88

pmalynin wrote: post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The govt could just print the money out. Sure inflation, but when your economy is crashing inflation will encourage spending

I don't think there would be inflation. Inflation begins (IMHO) when there's a lot of money in circulation: too much cash chasing too few resources, bidding up prices. In a bank run, people are taking home bills because they want them to be "safe" in case the bank goes under (never mind FDIC, which most people probably do not understand). Money sitting under the proverbial or literal mattress is not in circulation, a…

It wouldn’t immediately cause inflation, but eventually they would start spending that money under their mattress, causing the amount of money in circulation to increase.