Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Lyft lays off 17% of workforce, furloughs hundreds more

cnbc.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

351–360 of 595 posts

Re: Lyft lays off 17% of workforce, furloughs hundreds more

#351

Post by thewarrior »

bsanr2 wrote: post #71
baron_harkonnen wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This will play our more like the dotcom burst than the 2008 crisis. For most younger people here this may come as a shock but tech jobs can disappear, for years. The job market in 2019 felt a lot like the job market in 1999, people rushing to get upskilled so that they could get into software and make ridiculous money. After the dotcom burst huge number of people left tech, or at least left the world of software deve…

Which is gonna suck for a lot of people in major metros, as those salaries were necessary to keep up with asset inflation post-2008. Wariness about the future, spiced with a tinge of schadenfreude.

Well guess what those assets won't be able to sustain themselves without those salaries.

Re: Lyft lays off 17% of workforce, furloughs hundreds more

#352

Post by sangnoir »

eranima wrote: post #205
huevosabio wrote: post #181

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is a pretty grim path to follow. If States are to go bankrupt and subject to federal imposition of what debts must be paid, then it may push States to seek further sovereignity. An example being pressure to mint their currency. This is currently banned in the constitution, but if things get dire... they could simply ignore?

The constitution only has power if people are willing or motivated to enforce it.

In the apocryphal words of president Andrew Jackson: "John Marshall has made his decision; now let him enforce it!"

Re: Lyft lays off 17% of workforce, furloughs hundreds more

#353

Post by mbrameld »

chrisseaton wrote: post #327
mbrameld wrote: post #306

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The reference does include the meaning as applied in this thread, you just have to read past the first couple sentences. You do understand that the same word can have different meanings depending on the context, right? Edit: because I think you just won't be able to get there on your own, look under the heading "Defined benefit plans" on the Wikipedia page for Pension. If you need help defining the words in that sect…

Not really sure why you're so worked up about this? I thought a 401(k) was a pension, since it pays you money when you retire, which is what a pension is to me. I went looking it up on Wikipedia which said it was as well. Can you see how I'd think it was a pension? > If you need help defining the words in that section let me know Well I must not understand the word 'pension' then, because it says multiple times that…

I'm happy to explain. Let's start with the fundamentals: Do you understand that the meaning of a word is dependent on its context?

Re: Lyft lays off 17% of workforce, furloughs hundreds more

#354

Post by novok »

bhupy wrote: post #195
Loughla wrote: post #157

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Real questions. I'm not a history buff. Has there ever been a time in US history that the federal government has been so openly antagonistic and overtly willing to attack opposite-party state governments? If so, what were the outcomes? If not, is there anything even close? Current question - what is the endgame for those who what blue states to go bankrupt? What do they get if that happens, outside of talking points?…

I can try to give you the most "good faith" argument in favor of allowing Blue States to go bankrupt. There's a caveat here that the Federal laws will need to change a bit to allow States to go into packaged restructuring. And to ensure that we are bailing out specific individuals to ensure that they are not too negatively affected. One of the strongest arguments against "bailouts" of large corporations is that it ne…

Ehh, I think the fact that one industry is doing well vs another is dependent on the crisis itself. If this was a localized natural disaster type of issue or something like the berlin airlift, the travel industry would become ascendant and the retail sector (online or otherwise) would be hurt.

Re: Lyft lays off 17% of workforce, furloughs hundreds more

#355

Post by chrisseaton »

jgwil2 wrote: post #334
chrisseaton wrote: post #192

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Today, very few workers still have pensions I've never seen a professional job that didn't include a pension - certainly not in the tech industry.

Why are you going all up and down this thread trying to pedantically show that people are using the term "pension" slightly differently to Wikipedia's definition? It's not contributing anything to the discussion.

Well I just don’t get it. People say ‘nobody gets a pension anymore’ but a 401(k) is just a different type of pension. My defines benefit savings plans literally say ‘pension’ in the product names.

Re: Lyft lays off 17% of workforce, furloughs hundreds more

#357

Post by mikepurvis »

jshevek wrote: post #308
afterburner wrote: post #298

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Less gets done means the country gets worse and people get more radicalized trying to improve things. The polarization in the US is likely a direct result of the massive deadlock. Your strategy is one guaranteed to ruin your country.

> Less gets done means the country gets worse and people get more radicalized trying to improve things. This opinion requires a great deal of justification.

Isn't that exactly what we're seeing now? The government has basically been in gridlock since 2010, and voters have increasingly rewarded extreme policians who seek to shift the overton window over compromise politicians who work across party lines to find a middle ground.

The book American Carnage is a fantastic deep dive on this (and extremely fair and even-handed, despite the bombastic title).

Re: Lyft lays off 17% of workforce, furloughs hundreds more

#358

Post by diogenescynic »

wonderwonder wrote: post #121

Layoffs are mounting, alternative work is limited, and the unemployment systems in many states are either broken or running out of funding. Add the federal governments indicated desire to let blue states go bankrupt and we are looking at a good combination to enter a depression. Its a pretty sobering time.

I just finished my MBA and am getting laid off in the same month. It's really depressing.

Re: Lyft lays off 17% of workforce, furloughs hundreds more

#359

Post by bhupy »

novok wrote: post #354
bhupy wrote: post #195

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I can try to give you the most "good faith" argument in favor of allowing Blue States to go bankrupt. There's a caveat here that the Federal laws will need to change a bit to allow States to go into packaged restructuring. And to ensure that we are bailing out specific individuals to ensure that they are not too negatively affected. One of the strongest arguments against "bailouts" of large corporations is that it ne…

Ehh, I think the fact that one industry is doing well vs another is dependent on the crisis itself. If this was a localized natural disaster type of issue or something like the berlin airlift, the travel industry would become ascendant and the retail sector (online or otherwise) would be hurt.

Sure, airlines was just an example to drive home the more fundamental point.

There are a bajillion different variables that go into how we price corporations / assets in a decentralized way. This includes basic stuff like revenue, margins, balance sheets, growth, but can also include macro risk, which political party is in power, the current weather, etc. Apple isn't worth $1T because some schmuck decided it was worth that much, it's worth that much because we all play some part in the price discovery. When you remove some of the variables from this equation, the price becomes less reliable (mis-priced assets).

You might argue that it doesn't matter for most assets like airlines, and you'd probably be right about that, but there are certain types of assets like junk bonds where this has more negative consequences in the long run. We've been mis-pricing junk bonds to the degree that, at a macro level, there is way more capital being allocated to bad companies with poor fundamentals than there should be. We want more Amazons, Stripes, and Shopify's, and fewer WeWorks and SoftBanks.

States are similar, you have some States that are incredibly well run (Massachusetts, Washington) and some that are very poorly run (eg Illinois). We need some mechanism to nudge poorly run states in the right direction, and encourage well run States to keep doing what they're doing, and more.

Re: Lyft lays off 17% of workforce, furloughs hundreds more

#360

Post by mikepurvis »

lonelappde wrote: post #325
mikepurvis wrote: post #165

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There was an interesting piece in this week's Atlantic on the motivation for having states declare bankruptcy: "Under the Constitution, bankruptcy is a power entirely reserved to the federal government. An American bankruptcy is overseen in federal court, by a federal judge, according to federal law. That’s why federal law can allow U.S. cities to go bankrupt, as many have done over the years. That’s why the financia…

The Atlantic author seems deeply confused. Not unexpected for David Frum. Puerto Rico is a territory, not in any state. A city is under state sovereignty.A state or a city can default. A city can declare bankruptcy under Federal law. There is no law allowing a state to go bankrupt and be managed by the Feds. Bankruptcy is an option , not a Federal power. McConnell isn't playing 7 dimensional chess, he just doesn't wa…

> he [totally meant some other thing] and was just using language loosely when he said "bankrupt".

If that's so then he's had plenty of opportunity to make that known. Based on the media frenzy around this, it's quite clear that he meant and continues to mean a literal, actual, non-sarcastic bankruptcy.

Post reply on HN