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

Amazon cuts 16k jobs

reuters.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

411–420 of 1001 posts

Re: Amazon cuts 16k jobs

#411

Post by hintymad »

focusgroup0 wrote: post #37

>Amazon axes 16,000 American jobs as it ... relocates to a larger campus in India https://techcrunch.com/2025/12/10/amazon-to-invest-additiona...

People may have forgotten what happened back in early 2000s. Outsourcing was all the rage, and people in the US were really concerned. And then it came the explosive growth of internet, of mobile, of cloud, of social network, and etc. And then discussion died or at least dwindled enough that we stopped paying attention.

It looks to me that massive outsource means that companies turn to focus on incremental improvements, which won't require rapid communication in the same location. Besides, the tech has been growing amazingly for decades, other countries have caught up and therefore have growing number of talent. It's a matter of time for them to own more R&D.

Re: Amazon cuts 16k jobs

#412

Post by darth_avocado »

ericmay wrote: post #393
OJFord wrote: post #361

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's not really on them to think of an example to disprove themselves? Do you have one in mind?

Ok let's try this another way: if you are a big online retailer in a country, you will not have a big corporate presence in that country. Now it's on you to think of an example to disprove me, certainly I'm not going to think an example to disprove myself. Do you see the problem with this pattern? I could claim all sorts of things and then say, well sorry you have to go do all this work to refute my claims. Something…

> because in my mind there are a number of large online retailers that operate in the United States for example, without a large corporate presence here.

Amazon has a market share of 30-35% of ALL e-commerce in India. You’re making claims yourself, so I’d like to see examples of companies that operate at that scale in a country without corporate presence.

Also, there is a logical fallacy here that doesn’t make sense. If I claim A is true (and for a second let’s assume is actually true), then I cannot actually have an example of A being not true. If someone else claims that A is not true, they provide evidence of A not being true, instead of demanding such evidence.

And my evidence for my claim about big retailers having big corporate presence is based on all the big online retailers like Amazon, Wlmart, Target, Best Buy, EBay and others (top 20) all having big corporate presence in the country.

Re: Amazon cuts 16k jobs

#413

Post by nerdponx »

oytis wrote: post #386
nerdponx wrote: post #98

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Imagine that! It's almost like it's coordinated. Surely the US government would never do something like that on purpose.

I can't imagine Donald Trump would harm the US on purpose.

He absolutely would harm some people in the US to benefit other people in the US. The same is true for many many other businesspeople and politiciansl

Re: Amazon cuts 16k jobs

#414

Post by kjsingh »

If you have to post this, you are the reason for fear factor:

Some of you might ask if this is the beginning of a new rhythm – where we announce broad reductions every few months. That’s not our plan.

Re: Amazon cuts 16k jobs

#415

Post by bluecheese452 »

ghurtado wrote: post #252
boogrpants wrote: post #194

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's fiat wealth so... write the ledger however. The majority don't care so long as they have enough food and shelter and healthcare. The whole scoreboard based on bank accounts is all made up wankeroo. Let's just have AI avatars fight for gloating rights; Goku beat Superman on PPV so Japan gets to host the inter dimensional cable world cup! And otherwise keep the biologically essential logistics flowing cause that c…

> It's fiat wealth so... write the ledger however I'd like to see a serious study about the word "fiat" and whether it has been used to make a single valid economic argument in the last 30 years (auto maker excluded) Just kidding, I know it has not.

The judges of validity will be the architects of the current system.

Re: Amazon cuts 16k jobs

#416

Post by SoftTalker »

elzbardico wrote: post #199
ryandrake wrote: post #159

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've never understood this meme. Maybe I'm naive, but why would a company hire someone to "not do anything?" How would they stay employed if their performance review showed they "weren't doing anything?" Everyone around me is busy doing 3x the amount of work they can sustain because we're so short staffed. Where are these companies that have people just sitting there picking their nose watching YouTube? I've never re…

This is really complicated in big companies.

Yep especially where the number of reports on an org chart matters to a Director or AVP.

Re: Amazon cuts 16k jobs

#417

Post by echelon »

bluecheese452 wrote: post #410
echelon wrote: post #382

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Our competitors in another country will have no problem building those products. Then they'll be sold in America to American consumers. Then our industry deflates, because we can't compete on cost or labor scale / innovation. If we put up tariffs, we get a short respite. But now our goods don't sell as well overseas in the face of competition. Our industries still shrink. Eventually they become domestically uncompeti…

If my job is shipped to India today why would I care that twenty years later the boss is Indian instead of American?

> If my job is shipped to India today

Immigration isn't "shipping the job to India". It's bringing the labor here and contributing to our economy. This might have a suppressive force on wages, but it lifts the overall economy and creates more opportunity and demand.

Offshoring is permanent loss. It causes whatever jobs and industry are still here to atrophy and die. The overall economy weakens. Your outlook in retirement will be bleaker.

If you have to pick between the two, it's obvious which one to pick.

Re: Amazon cuts 16k jobs

#418

Post by ericmay »

darth_avocado wrote: post #412
ericmay wrote: post #393

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ok let's try this another way: if you are a big online retailer in a country, you will not have a big corporate presence in that country. Now it's on you to think of an example to disprove me, certainly I'm not going to think an example to disprove myself. Do you see the problem with this pattern? I could claim all sorts of things and then say, well sorry you have to go do all this work to refute my claims. Something…

> because in my mind there are a number of large online retailers that operate in the United States for example, without a large corporate presence here. Amazon has a market share of 30-35% of ALL e-commerce in India. You’re making claims yourself, so I’d like to see examples of companies that operate at that scale in a country without corporate presence. Also, there is a logical fallacy here that doesn’t make sense.…

Here was the OP's claim:

> if you are a big online retailer in a country, you will have a big corporate presence in that country.

They made a general claim that a big retailer in a country will have a big corporate presence in that country. I don't know if that's true or not - hence my response.

They didn't claim that a big retailer in India will have a big corporate presence, nor did claim that a retailer approaching 35% of e-commerce must have a large corporate presence in the country. It was an ambiguous claim, which is why I asked a few follow up questions.

> You’re making claims yourself, so I’d like to see examples of companies that operate at that scale in a country without corporate presence.

I didn't make this claim so there's nothing for me to provide.

Re: Amazon cuts 16k jobs

#420

Post by caminante »

hypeatei wrote: post #298
nxm wrote: post #263

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And yet prices are marginally up while all the "economists" expected major inflation. Dollar vs Euro is at same level now as it was in 2019 - there are benefits to the economy as well when the currency is less strong.

> "economists" expected major inflation Gold front runs monetary policy and "economists" aren't the only ones trading that. Look at the gold chart for the past year. I don't think it's really disputed that high inflation is on the horizon due to the debt situation (which Trump has made worse with the OBBB) > there are benefits to the economy as well when the currency is less strong Care to list those? I can think of…

> I don't think it's really disputed that high inflation is on the horizon

This is moving the goalpost because you know economists (the critics) forecasted major inflation sooner/now, and it hasn't happened.

> Care to list those? [...] it assumes that we're already in the position of being an export based economy which we're not and not tangibly working towards.

You're not making sense or making coherent thoughts. The US is still the #2 exporting country in the world in absolute terms despite importing a relatively higher amount.

Post reply on HN