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

Macroeconomic changes have made it impossible for me to want to pay you

mcsweeneys.net

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

171–180 of 414 posts

Re: Macroeconomic changes have made it impossible for me to want to pay you

#171

Post by lowercased »

shever73 wrote: post #35
kqr wrote: post #12

> The fact is, if I wanted to pay you, I could. I could even give you raises. But once again, that is not the economic reality we face. And so we must make hard choices. Maybe I've hung around in the wrong circles too much recently, but this hit me hard. This is basically how the reasoning behind all top management decisions have been communicated to me in the past year: "There is indeed a clearly better alternative…

> The fact is, if I wanted to pay you, I could. I could even give you raises. But once again, that is not the economic reality we face. And so we must make hard choices. True...contrast Microsoft's decision to take an $800m hit in letting go 10,000 employees with its earnings report showing $16.4b operating profits.

Some analysts were expecting $18b in operating profits - can't you see how much loss MSFT just incurred?

EDIT: /s

Re: Macroeconomic changes have made it impossible for me to want to pay you

#172

Post by gavinmckenzie »

Amazing. There was a time, nearly 20 years ago, that I was let go from Adobe. My colleagues assumed that because of my position/tenure/knowledge that I was layoff-proof. I told them that I was just a number in a large organization, and that orgs of a certain scale don’t do layoffs in a way that looks at each individual. Sure enough I was let go and after 16 years at the same company, that was acquired by Adobe where I spent 5 years, my overall feeling was “meh, I knew the end was nigh”. Since then I’ve been a contractor, and I couldn’t be happier. The relationship between me and my client is simple: I work, and they pay me. Sure there’s no stock option perks, but on the other hand I never have to deal with HR processes, submit quarterly objectives, etc. I work, I get paid. I know when the contract will end, and either the client renews the contract or I go somewhere else. It’s all fine.

For me, reducing my work life down to such a simple transactional level has been incredibly freeing and stress reducing, and allowed me to focus even more clearly on the work.

Re: Macroeconomic changes have made it impossible for me to want to pay you

#173

Post by binarymax »

shever73 wrote: post #35
kqr wrote: post #12

> The fact is, if I wanted to pay you, I could. I could even give you raises. But once again, that is not the economic reality we face. And so we must make hard choices. Maybe I've hung around in the wrong circles too much recently, but this hit me hard. This is basically how the reasoning behind all top management decisions have been communicated to me in the past year: "There is indeed a clearly better alternative…

> The fact is, if I wanted to pay you, I could. I could even give you raises. But once again, that is not the economic reality we face. And so we must make hard choices. True...contrast Microsoft's decision to take an $800m hit in letting go 10,000 employees with its earnings report showing $16.4b operating profits.

Even harsher is that on the same day Microsoft laid off their staff, they announced a 10B investment in OpenAI.

Re: Macroeconomic changes have made it impossible for me to want to pay you

#174

Post by NhanH »

LBJsPNS wrote: post #149

But you don't understand! These people who were laid off are important ! So much so they didn't need a union, because the company couldn't possibly let them go. Unions are for all those other people who aren't important ! Perhaps some of you are beginning to understand the term Solidarity Forever.

Union does not protect you from layoff. They will be able to negotiate for severance package, but seeing the way big techs are handling it, I highly doubt unions can negotiate a better one.

Re: Macroeconomic changes have made it impossible for me to want to pay you

#176

Post by WeylandYutani »

TheOtherHobbes wrote: post #95
roenxi wrote: post #31

Management needs to be made up of the sort of people who make economically optimum decisions. Without diminishing the horrible experience of being fired; if we have people who purposefully keep tens of thousands of people working on jobs that don't make sense to them, on aggregate society will be much worse for everyone. We have a system that allows people to do unpopular things, like this, because it works better th…

No it doesn't. It works better for 1% of the population. Everyone else is a health crisis away from bankruptcy. Literally. That's all it takes in the US for everyone who doesn't have an eight-figure-or-more net worth to be staring ruin in the face. Your comment is exactly the mythology that perpetuates the problem. Exploitation is sold as participation. "Well we're paid fairly well so I guess we must be privileged an…

The American people have repeatedly voted against universal healthcare. Since the 1950s actually.

Microsoft shouldn't be in the business of providing dental care for it's employees. Blaming corporations for the dismal state of the healthcare system is unfair.

Re: Macroeconomic changes have made it impossible for me to want to pay you

#177

Post by beezle »

pbhjpbhj wrote: post #50
Aeolun wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> their job is to increase value for investors Is their job to increase it in the short or the long term? These “I know we’ve been doing great for 3 years, but the past 3 months haven’t been so hot, so we’re going to cut jobs.” Messages seem incredibly shortsighted.

Do investors sell if they company income falls for a quarter? I'm guessing yes, and that answers the question of whether the company looks to the short term when seeking only to satisfy investors. The whole system is wrong.

Always forgotten: for every seller there must be a buyer.

Generally speaking, unless there is a fundamental change in outlook, selling based upon the latest earnings report is the hot money which attempts to chase the latest greatest and is moving on (and rarely tells you about their misses).

Re: Macroeconomic changes have made it impossible for me to want to pay you

#178

Post by [deleted] »

Tade0 wrote: post #63

> Even as we speak, they’re streamlining, optimizing, and booking the best contractors in the Bay Area for the next eighteen months. I suppose the author didn't want to sound racist or the equivalent that concerns people of the same skin tone but, somehow, different economic situations and options in life, but over here in Eastern Europe Google and Amazon have been hiring all this time.

[deleted]

Re: Macroeconomic changes have made it impossible for me to want to pay you

#179

Post by Aunche »

John23832 wrote: post #133
wildrhythms wrote: post #101

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> People tend to overestimate their "skill/contribution" even in poor luck or even rigged scenarios. I don't personally understand this one, although I don't doubt its veracity. I am an engineer with years of experience in the industry, but I don't think my contribution is high or important; I could be fired at any moment and would anyone notice? Maybe in the short term yes, but mostly no. I am easily replaceable, my…

Because the threat of firing and the driving down of your self worth as a worker is core to (American style) capitalism. Your fear for your job or the prospect of having to find another one makes you take suboptimal economic positions, the arbitrage of which keeps the gears of capital spinning. We couldn’t have the workers collectively realizing their worth now, could we? The inmates would be running the asylum.

This narrative is counterfactual to how capitalism actually works. Your worth is determined by supply and demand. Investors would never agree to paying American developers twice as much as European developers if they knew they would be on the hook for them until their cash reserves bled dry.
Post reply on HN