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

431–440 of 595 posts

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

#431

Post by danso »

notyourday wrote: post #296
danso wrote: post #247

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A 401(K) is not a pension. The latter is funded entirely by the employer.

That's not the case. Pensions are not always funded entirely by employer. In quite a few cases the salary of a worker is reduced by a certain amount that is added to what is contributed towards a pension by an employer. The difference between a pension and 401(k) type plan is that pension is a defined benefit plan and 401(k) type plan is a defined contribution plan.

Yes, you're right that a pension often involves a reduced salary for the promise of a pension at retirement age. That's a huge part of the appeal of a public sector job that pays significantly less than its counter parts in the private sector. And that's why public sector employees get extremely angry and litigious when governments try to reduce their obligations, even as agencies face dire financial straits.

Which 401(k) plans are you thinking of require paying out to a retired employee if that employee has contributed 0%?

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

#432

Post by rayhendricks »

TrackerFF wrote: post #210
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?…

End game is: GOP knows they're gonna lose the election. They want to hand the dems the worst economy possible. Then, 4 years down the road, they can start campaigning against "do-nothing-dems" and point to the horrible economy they had to start fixing.

Romney is already positioning himself to run in 2024 with the vote to convict over abuse of power.

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

#433

Post by wonderwonder »

mrnobody_67 wrote: post #409
DiogenesKynikos wrote: post #337

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's amazing that the US Federal government seems to be able to provide trillions of dollars in liquidity on a moment's notice to anyone and everyone - except the states. Airlines? Of course. Junk bond investors? Sure, why not? States? "We're not going to bail out Democratic-run states."

Don't forget Carnival Cruise Lines... which doesn't even pay any taxes in the US as a corporation since it flies a flag of convenience and doesn't employ many Americans.

I mean that's easily explained. The Saudis just purchased 8% of them. Wouldn't want the Saudis to lose money would you? /s

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

#434

Post by hemantv »

product50 wrote: post #429
hemantv wrote: post #423

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is just crazy to me, this public servants takes unprecedented risks and take lower pays so they can take stable retirement. Now it comes time for due, we don't want to fund these anymore. The entitlement in HN is just too much.

What risk is an accountant sitting in SF City Hall taking? High risk positions - sure give them more security. Otherwise, treat them like everyone else. Also, people goto govt jobs because of job security as well - which is also a factor in lower income.

if you are going to cherry-pick, then so be it.

what about the police, fire department?

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

#435

Post by bogomipz »

Shivetya wrote: post #304
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…

His unwillingness to not solve the state's pension problems should be applauded. the amount of unfunded liabilities is in the hundreds of billions of dollars and approaching a trillion if it has not passed that already. This all happened because the number of public servants who are pulling in over 100k has skyrocketed... 100k+ in retirement.. with millions past 50k! Think about that 50k in pay plus medical. These pe…

Unfunded pension obligations have seemed to be a ticking time bomb for quite a long time now. Some of the per household pension debt ranges are really quite spectacular[1]. If you look at the figures for places like Alaska, California and Connecticut it's hard to imagine them getting out from underneath it.

[1] https://us.pensiontracker.org/

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

#436

Post by product50 »

hemantv wrote: post #434
product50 wrote: post #429

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What risk is an accountant sitting in SF City Hall taking? High risk positions - sure give them more security. Otherwise, treat them like everyone else. Also, people goto govt jobs because of job security as well - which is also a factor in lower income.

if you are going to cherry-pick, then so be it. what about the police, fire department?

Read my comment. Don't be ignorant. I literally said that for high risk positions, give them more pension.

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

#437

Post by Domenic_S »

cortesoft wrote: post #417
ac29 wrote: post #405

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Many pensions are not the "have $27k/yr starting at age 67" kind, but the "have $100k/yr + benefits starting at age 55" kind. Its the latter that people find upsetting - nothing close to poverty level.

Sure, but people took those jobs in large part because of those pensions. It is part of the entire compensation package. They often times took less money up front in return for better pensions. The problem is that this was not properly budgeted for when funding the pensions.

I don't blame workers for taking a good deal. I do blame the folks making crazy promises that have no way to fund without being bailed out.

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

#438

Post by koheripbal »

notyourwork wrote: post #317
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.

As sad as it is, I hope all those who voted for this are willing to accept the fate bestowed upon us from our 2016 election and the political stonewalling from both parties.

Did I miss the news item that confirmed Trump cause covid-19?

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

#439

Post by koheripbal »

diogenescynic wrote: post #358
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.

Great time to start a company

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

#440

Post by atq2119 »

bilbo0s wrote: post #319
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.

There are democratic nations with many more parties than we have, and the quality of governance in many of these nations has proven to be as serviceable as the quality of governance in the US. (Some might even argue that many of these nations have displayed superior governance to the US despite the power being split up among so many parties that they need coalitions to accomplish the little they can get done.) I've n…

It could be argued that governance is better in other countries at least in part because there are more parties. After all, it enables alternative voices to be represented better, and it reduces the power of centralised party structures.

On the other hand, too many parties becomes unwieldy, and I'd argue that 10 is already going to be too many in practice.

Historical experience in the early 20th century led many countries to develop minimum bars, e.g. parties with fewer than 5% of the vote not getting any seats in parliament.

Post reply on HN