Live data from Hacker News

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

mcsweeneys.net

361–370 of 414 posts

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

#361

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The quote was Lord Farquhard (not pronounced Fuckwad) in Shrek I, IIRC.

Who was patterned after Disney’s Michael Eisner IIRC.

I did a quick check of his education.

I think the US is at 12 years + 4 for university, that's 16 in total. Actually, I think kindergarten is another 2 years. So that's 18 years. All of them in private institutions.

At current tuition rates, all of the places he went to cost about $60k per year.

So that's about $1m just in his education...

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

#362

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Let's do a little root cause analysis. Why do companies like Google, Microsoft and Amazon, with massive income streams combined with substantial cash holdings, need investor money? Maybe Toyota's "Five Why's" can shed some light on it. We need to fire thousands of people. Why? Because it will make us more attractive for investors. Why? So they put their money in our company. Why? Because that will buoy our stock pric…

The median shareholder in Microsoft, Google and Amazon is likely a lower economic class than the median employee at these corporations if I had to guess. The framing of ordinary workers getting the boot so fat cats can buy bigger yachts is seductive but I can just as easily frame it as: Fixed income, middle America boomers entrusted these companies to be good stewards of their capital but it was instead spent on payi…

> The median shareholder in Microsoft, Google and Amazon is likely a lower economic class than the median employee at these corporations if

> I had to guess.

You guess incorrectly

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

#363

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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

Its not actual satire though ... Missing analyst expectations is a massive failure of management, they set the guidance and the expectations for the market; thus missing it by 2bn is actually a pretty poor performance.

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

#364
post #334

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I wholeheartedly disagree. It is trivial to generalize. Careful observation resulting in nuanced findings is difficult precisely, because we tend to crave simple answers. Generalizing isn't always a bad thing, but this situation really is trivial to observe. There aren't too many possible outcomes. If (boss + worker) make money, (boss + worker) keep the job. If (boss + worker) don't make money, someone (or both) lo…

I was with you. I was genuinely nodding along ( including the other comment ) until this portion. That is a hard no. Notice how there is seemingly simultaneously not enough money in the budget for tech workers ( I do not want to limit this conversation to IT support, which is what many equate IT with -- did the use of that acronym change ? ) while there is indeed money for MS executives to enjoy the show[1], money fo…

> until this portion. That is a hard no.

Ok, I accept your argument as valid. There are sufficient funds that could be used for salaries.

Let's imagine for a second you are hiring me. You have $40 in bank and I cost you $1 a year. In past 5 years, I never made you a single $. I just cost you $1 a year, with slight increases. You paid me $5 so far.

Would you keep paying me $1 a year or would you rather invest (the $5 you'd spend on me in next 5 years) into this new thing called AI, hoping you might get $10 out of it?

Purely looking at numbers, deciding objectively and without emotion - what seems the best for you?

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

#365

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> They're a business, they need to reallocate capital and headcount Consider this: no, they don't.

I've considered it, and of all the possible takes, I think this is the worst one. It's simple: - They are chartered as a for-profit entity - FAANG workers who are making an average $200K or whatever don't need welfare. Like I'm all for class warfare, but not between the super rich and the very rich. I don't have any sympathy whatsoever for the $200K class when they get laid off - being worth this much money includes…

Well said. For me, complaints of layoffs in tech companies and startups fall on deaf ears. I say this as someone who works for a startup, and whose partner works for Google.

It has been incredibly obvious that technology companies over-hired during the pandemic and that the growth they were seeing was not sustainable. The “we prepared for a different economic reality than the one we face today” is hogwash. Rather than preparing, they post-pared for the economic reality they were in, not the one that they could easily have seen coming.

Rather than directing anger toward the managerial class for layoffs, I’d rather see anger directed toward them for over-hiring in the first place. Nobody is mad when they’re at the party, even when they know it can’t last forever, but everyone will is upset when the music stops.

Also, FWIW regarding compensation, I agree. I recently saw on levels.fyi what a recruiter at Google makes - starting, with equity and bonus, is substantially more than me as a software engineer ~5 years out of college. I voiced my amazement to my girlfriend, and she told me, “well at least you still have a job”. Sorry, I don’t feel an ounce of sympathy. That recruiter could take the next four years off from working entirely, and we’d come out about the same in earnings. As tech workers, we are all out of touch with “everyday people”, but those working at FAANG companies are out of touch even with the rest of the tech ecosystem.

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

#367

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…

Yes, large companies execute layoffs en masse by location, function or group, regardless of individual qualifications, in order to avoid discrimination lawsuits. Though, there are always workarounds when managers want to keep their highest performers off the list.

> Though, there are always workarounds when managers want to keep their highest performers off the list.

Never assume you are safe. I was a single point of failure on a team that was supposed to be revving up for some pretty important strategic initiatives. My manager put me on a “do not fire” list prior to the company conducting a layoff of 30% of the company last fall. Still got canned. My manager went tried to determine why I had been let go when he specifically indicated I was a single point of failure . Turns out, it was because someone in HR had mixed up some spreadsheets :/

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

#368

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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

Its not actual satire though ... Missing analyst expectations is a massive failure of management, they set the guidance and the expectations for the market; thus missing it by 2bn is actually a pretty poor performance.

Say company X issues guidance of $1.34/share

Analysts expect $1.40/share.

Company X releases earnings of $1.45/share.

Things still tank, because... the "real" expectation was 5% over analyst expectations, which was already over guidance.

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

#369
post #365

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've considered it, and of all the possible takes, I think this is the worst one. It's simple: - They are chartered as a for-profit entity - FAANG workers who are making an average $200K or whatever don't need welfare. Like I'm all for class warfare, but not between the super rich and the very rich. I don't have any sympathy whatsoever for the $200K class when they get laid off - being worth this much money includes…

Well said. For me, complaints of layoffs in tech companies and startups fall on deaf ears. I say this as someone who works for a startup, and whose partner works for Google. It has been incredibly obvious that technology companies over-hired during the pandemic and that the growth they were seeing was not sustainable. The “we prepared for a different economic reality than the one we face today” is hogwash. Rather tha…

> Rather than directing anger toward the managerial class for layoffs, I’d rather see anger directed toward them for over-hiring in the first place.

Almost every criticism I see if the “managerial class” includes criticism for over hiring. That’s the point. Management making strategically unsustainable decisions is what resulted in over hiring. It’s a mistake by those in management, but the consequences, layoffs, are entirely born by those who had no hand in it.

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

#370

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I’m pretty sure that if you need some stock to grow in order to support your children, then your influence on a public company is virtually irrelevant.

You have a good point on my individual control of a public company is quite small. Luckily, basically every single other stockholder has the same reason for owning the stock as me- making money. There is basically no risk that a different group of stockholders with more voting power want to run it as a public works jobs program

Yet the fact that shareholders want to get richer doesn’t mean that laying off people when a company is drowning in money is ethically right.
Post reply on HN