51–60 of 70 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Good for you that you are so sure. Now you can short some stocks and make easy money. Boy is this not financial advice...
Deutsche Bank already made it very clear that according to their analysts there will be a significant recession in the US this or next year
Earlier quoted context omitted.
9 months is an absolutely stupidly long for an EU position. The pay is so meh that it is not worth it
9 months is a typical amount of time it takes to network your way into a company. The key is patience, persistence, keeping multiple options open, flexibility, and understanding the needs of your future colleagues. When it works it looks lucky, but you can't rush "luck" of this type. :)
More interested in how it works than what it does later with that mechanism. Also, this is great but it'd be helpful to add "employees hired" (not necessarily by the same companies that are laying off) since March 2020 too to calculate the net impact instead of having a linear metric that just grows.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Have enough cash to keep you afloat for at least 6+ months of unemployment. If that's not currently the situation try to cut back expenses where you can to reach that state (to a reason), and imo even on the expense of 401k contributions (but please remember to start again once you have enough cash).
You can borrow from your own 401k. No reason to limit contributions.
More interested in how it works than what it does later with that mechanism. Also, this is great but it'd be helpful to add "employees hired" (not necessarily by the same companies that are laying off) since March 2020 too to calculate the net impact instead of having a linear metric that just grows.
Also because there's a meaningful difference between 100 net layoffs when it means "1 hired and 101 laid off" or "9900 hired and 10000 laid off."
Earlier quoted context omitted.
9 months is a typical amount of time it takes to network your way into a company. The key is patience, persistence, keeping multiple options open, flexibility, and understanding the needs of your future colleagues. When it works it looks lucky, but you can't rush "luck" of this type. :)
That does not sound right?....Usual IT positions in Europe (50-80k jobs) always took max 1-2 months for me.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I've generally taken at least that long looking for new jobs. It depends on whether you want /a/ position, or /the/ position. My past few jobs have been perfect fits for my background and interests, and I genuinely enjoyed work. A random SWE position is petty fungible. Perfect fits are rare. Markets are pretty inefficient too, so you can command better salary or benefits, if you want.
Or better commute, meaning of work, or intellectual stimulation. Put yourself into a situation where you can take your time, then take it. You are responsible for making your own reality.
Absolute desire to leave but not for some rubbish compromise out of desperation. It can be frustrating but I believe it will be worthwhile to get the right role. And, importantly, I'm in no despeate rush.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Also because there's a meaningful difference between 100 net layoffs when it means "1 hired and 101 laid off" or "9900 hired and 10000 laid off."
Why does there have to be one or the other? There should be both the metrics.
When I click on a column header to sort the data, a "sorted by 1 field" dropdown opens and covers the top rows of the newly sorted data. Then if I click the x in the corner of said dropdown, it removes the filter (and doesn't close the dropdown). Clicking outside of the table doesn't close it either, since the table is embedded.