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

Coinbase lays off around 1,100 employees

coindesk.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

991–1000 of 1001 posts

Re: Coinbase lays off around 1,100 employees

#991

Post by xapata »

tzs wrote: post #512
xapata wrote: post #414

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's a relic from the days when Americans only wanted "upstanding citizens" to get subsidized healthcare.

It actually came about due to labor shortages during WWII. So many people were drafted into the military or voluntarily joining that employers were having trouble finding enough workers. To prevent this from leading to rampant inflation the US passed laws that regulated wages and prices, such as the Emergency Price Control Act of 1942 and the Stabilization Act of 1942. Insurance and pension benefits were not counted…

Racism and classism is an equally convincing explanation.

Re: Coinbase lays off around 1,100 employees

#992

Post by aliswe »

bmitc wrote: post #984
aliswe wrote: post #955

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Serious question, where has this ever worked / is currently working?

Middle-class folks are taxed at 20-35%, so it literally works all the time for everyone else. Inequality continues to rise and wealth continues to concentrate. This is because taxes that used to work and be in place for the rich are no longer there. The wealthy used to pay much more tax. Are you seriously okay with the ultra rich living by completely different rules than everyone else? I think it's probably underesti…

To be honest yes I am ... I dont know maybe I am a bit royalist in that sense.

Re: Coinbase lays off around 1,100 employees

#993

Post by x3n0ph3n3 »

samhw wrote: post #942
x3n0ph3n3 wrote: post #789

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I'd personally just declare: "I have low money and I had to fire your laptop service, thanks for the work of getting it to me, I'll be keeping it now." I think you could then expect a knock on your door from a couple of police officers. [1] 1. https://www.reddit.com/r/bestoflegaladvice/comments/v9acuq/l...

I think you could then count on the expectation that, as they say, 'not a jury in the land'...

I find that doubtful.

Re: Coinbase lays off around 1,100 employees

#994

Post by kortilla »

bildung wrote: post #909
kortilla wrote: post #566

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> believe the answer is that the USA will be better able to outcompete those countries that do have them Based on what? The US already outcompetes these other countries in business success and average citizen income. What countries don’t have billionaires that are competitive? > History has shown time and again that massive inequality is a huge barrier to maximizing the productivity of all of a society's members. His…

> History has literally never shown this. Empirically, this is actually beyond doubt by now. Piketty et al. were in the news 10 years ago with this very topic, showing that inequality is detrimental to growth, for many countries and over very large periods of time. And there has been a bunch of additional studies after that publication that support these findings.

No, that’s not what Piketty showed. I suggest you re-review their work.

There is no evidence about it stifling growth in the US in his work nor any follow-up work.

Re: Coinbase lays off around 1,100 employees

#995

Post by kortilla »

Johnny555 wrote: post #575
kortilla wrote: post #562

Earlier quoted context omitted.

These billionaires don’t have a billion dollars in cash. They have a huge chunk of a company shares that are currently valued at >1 billion. So what you’re proposing is just that a company’s shares are taken away from the founders/execs as the company grows. It’s not just that you’re taking wealth away from them, but you’re fundamentally forcing them to sell off control of the company.

Well, I'm not proposing that people and companies do anything specific, it's up to them how to handle it. Maybe they'll choose to use less stock based compensation and more cash, maybe CEO's will end up with less compensation in general and the companies will retain more of that money for their own operations. but you’re fundamentally forcing them to sell off control of the company That part is true. Billionaires can…

> Well, I'm not proposing that people and companies do anything specific, it's up to them how to handle it.

There is no other way. I don’t think you understand how shares of a company work. There isn’t some secret treasure chest of cash the owners have to pay that burden. They just have to sell off portions of the company because that’s what has value. This eventually results in a loss of control and dim-witted bureaucrats like the fund managers at black rock start to dictate direction.

The whole stance is antithetical to innovation all for the sake of wanting to take something because it has a high potential value.

Re: Coinbase lays off around 1,100 employees

#996

Post by nixt26 »

sytelus wrote: post #924
kleer001 wrote: post #672

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What's insufficient to your needs with their current transaction reports? It's bare bones, but I think it's useful.

For many legal requirements, you need to provide monthly statements of accounts. You need to show balance at each closing period. Every financial account in world does this.

I was a Coinbase employee who was going to build this feature. Then I got laid off :(

Re: Coinbase lays off around 1,100 employees

#997

Post by __pache__ »

3np wrote: post #772
__pache__ wrote: post #720

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So if I make a pill that cures cancer, _it_ is worth 100bn, but I am only worth 50m? how does that make any sense?

It can makes sense if you take the position that medicine patents should be heavily reformed. Shoulders and giants - there's no way you actually fully independently discover a cancer-curing pill. And even if you did, its existence would not and should not belong fully to you.

that still doesn't make sense. if I make $50bn I am worth a significant amount of that, if not most of it.

> its existence would not and should not belong fully to you

...if I didn't make it, it doesn't exist, so it fully belongs to me ..................

Re: Coinbase lays off around 1,100 employees

#998

Post by kleer001 »

nixt26 wrote: post #996
sytelus wrote: post #924

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For many legal requirements, you need to provide monthly statements of accounts. You need to show balance at each closing period. Every financial account in world does this.

I was a Coinbase employee who was going to build this feature. Then I got laid off :(

You think CB is going to make it through this current massacre?

Re: Coinbase lays off around 1,100 employees

#1000

Post by Shocka1 »

okasaki wrote: post #906
14u2c wrote: post #893

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The problem with this logic is that real estate values are out of control. In my city not uncommon to see stories of families who have owned a home for generation or more being forced to sell it because the value of the land went from $200k to $800k in 10 years and is now taxed as such.

If the value of the land goes up with increased economic activity, but you're not economically active enough to continue living in the area, how is it unreasonable to be expected to sell? The other side of every "family was forced to sell" is "another family was very happy to move in".

I agree with you mostly, even though it's somewhat heartless and maybe too black and white. I'm from an area where this exact scenario is happening to a lot of home owners.

There is a point where I think it's okay to factor an unexpected large housing market increase into the equation. To raise a community's property tax unrealistically because a mass influx of buyers are willing to overextend their credit doesn't make much sense to me.

Also, I think this applies even more to our current situation and the fact that a lot of these communities had nothing to do with the politically charged economic decisions our politicians made with close to zero debate, and ultimately, the economic fallout it has created.

In my home state in the Midwest I have always thought a better way to go about it in the future would be to factor median salary and wages into the mix. That, along with an unrealistic housing market increase. I'm not sure what unrealistic would be defined as, but median value increasing 2x in five years is definitely unrealistic. At the very least things like this should be debated.

Post reply on HN