> 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”
Also generates less clicks. I probably wouldn't have clicked this if it said "most job cuts in a quarter since 2015". I also feel like the scale of this graph makes this look a lot worse than the numbers indicate.
I feel like saying in a decade also attempts to lay a bunch of things at the current administrations feet by implying it's worse than anything that happened during the previous adminstration.
For the record, my honest opinion is that both of these (and other, yet, previous) administrations share fault.
This sort of headline writing is for cowards and weasels.
But then: Job market bounces back in March with 196,000 gain in payrolls https://www.cnbc.com/2019/04/05/nonfarm-payrolls-march-2019.... Everyone just kinda shuffled around it seems.
The FDIC couldn’t handle a run on every bank. If people thought there would be a massive run, they’d rush to withdraw their money despite the FDIC. So it’s really both: belief in the FDIC’s ability to handle small runs gives people the belief that there won’t be big ones.
I'm curious how people envision a bank run looking in the era of digital banking. You already can't get much cash from a bank in good times because hardly anyone uses cash anymore for large purchases. Presumably Venmo, Visa et al will work just fine.
You can walk into a bank and ask for all the cash in your account, if its over a certain dollar amount they'll ask you to fill out an IRS form, otherwise there is nothing barring getting cash from a bank.
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.
More of a positive feedback loop than a self-fulfilling prophesy.
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.
This is the "bullwhip effect": https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bullwhip_effect
Sort of like Cardi B is popular because there's near zero supply of new music, so it seems as though people actually like Cardi B, when in reality, they lack choices, and yet, have terabytes of bandwidth and flash memory, and high dynamic range, sound isolating neodymium speakers to listen to former strippers brag about how much money they spend.
I've never been a manager or had any role in laying someone off. But I've been laid off myself and know plenty people who get laid off and suffer the consequences, some quite severe. So I sometimes wonder, how do these managers who lay off people sleep at night? I mean they are just doing their job so that THEY themselves don't get laid off. And next I wonder, who are these rich rich people who want more money so tha…
You lay people off so that the company doesn't go bankrupt. Going bankrupt ruins more peoples' lives.
How does a profitable company justify layoffs then?
>... it is a manager's job to lay off employees. I feel awful for those people whose lives have just been disrupted so. I’m particularly empathetic because, as a foster parent, I know very well what may happen to some of those families.
I've never been a manager or had any role in laying someone off. But I've been laid off myself and know plenty people who get laid off and suffer the consequences, some quite severe. So I sometimes wonder, how do these managers who lay off people sleep at night? I mean they are just doing their job so that THEY themselves don't get laid off. And next I wonder, who are these rich rich people who want more money so tha…
Laying people off is almost never fun. I say almost because sometimes there are people who make everyone around them absolutely miserable for no reason, and in times like that you get to feel like the good guy or gal. Most times though it's a gut wrenching, horrible thing to have to do. You make friends, despite warning yourself to keep a professional distance, you try to limit the fallout when you can, and you know that you're probably next. A lot of times you don't sleep well at night. Sometimes you're tempted to warn people. At the end of the day you're still human. Aside from sociopaths who don't have the ability to feel empathy, it's hard for most people and some people give these hard decisions as the reason sociopaths are often in roles where hard decisions that impact people, it's a benefit for them.
There are so many contradicting predictions all the time. You could for example say that it's because everyone thinks that the robots that are to steal everyone's job are around the corner, so everyone is preparing for it.
The stock market finds the 'correct' price for stocks, by aggregating conflicting beliefs and predictions of traders. When the beliefs are overwhelmingly pessimistic, stock prices drop. Why should companies behave any differently with respect to layoffs?
>overwhelmingly pessimistic
overwhelmingly as accounted for by head count or size of portfolios?