There's an asymmetry here where Twitter and other companies get blamed for layoffs, but didn't get praised for providing highly paid jobs that put their employees in the top 1%.
Even Stripe just had layoffs and they are a much more productive, tighter run ship.
Twitter cutting deeper than Stripe shouldn't be surprising. It's not a secret that they were overstaffed and are known for rest & vest.
This goes way back. In 2014 there was a show called Silicon Valley that had an entire character and subplots based on this phenomenon in tech companies. Big Head hanging out on the roof resonated for a reason. Compassion is warranted regardless and productive employees got caught in this too, but that doesn't mean we have to engage in selective amnesia and kneejerk outrage.
Well, it's mostly not Twitter betting blamed for layoffs, it's Musk. Twitter provided those jobs, not Musk. Musk is doing the layoffs, not Twitter. So someone not responsible in the least for the creation of those jobs is ending them.
That is not to say the layoffs were not needed or justified (I don't know) but the asymmetry exists because it's an asymmetric situation.
Layoffs that improve economic productivity should be celebrated. The executives who do them should be congratulated. They are creating economic surplus by freeing up labor to add value elsewhere in the economy where it's needed more. So few people understand how much human prosperity would be stunted if people weren't allowed to be terminated when they were no longer productively adding value in a position.
it's important to distinguish short-run productivity and long-term sustainability. systems need slack. if you take away all the shoulders on all the highways you will get improvements in throughput and cost per trip. and any breakdown will be much worse because responders can't get through to clear it.
layoffs shouldn't be celebrated because they cause pain and they mean someone screwed up.
time will tell whether Musk is putting the business on a sustainable footing or killing a golden goose.
I'm assuming here that the layoffs are overall net good for the company. If the layoffs jeopardize long-term sustainability too much, then that assumption is violated.
> In 2014 there was a show called Silicon Valley ...
Yeah, we've heard of it.
> resonated for a reason
Mike Judge has a gift for exaggeration and humor. I'd be surprised if even one out of 100 so called 'slacker' rest and vest employees even resembled 1/10 of big head's cluelessness and "beach / roof" lifestyle.
Agh, I WISH tech companies provided jobs that put employees in the top 1%. The truth is that in an era of gigantic wealth inequality, being in the top 1% of income doesn't mean shit. I may make good money, but when I can't even afford the shittiest studio apartment in town and I have no choice but to be a renter bitch, it doesn't make me feel rich at all.
I looked it up and the top 1% of income is $823,000 a year. So I take back what I said, as it's clear that even the gleaming tech companies are NOT in fact handing out 1% salaries like candy.
Even Stripe just had layoffs and they are a much more productive, tighter run ship.
Twitter cutting deeper than Stripe shouldn't be surprising. It's not a secret that they were overstaffed and are known for rest & vest.
This goes way back. In 2014 there was a show called Silicon Valley that had an entire character and subplots based on this phenomenon in tech companies. Big Head hanging out on the roof resonated for a reason. Compassion is warranted regardless and productive employees got caught in this too, but that doesn't mean we have to engage in selective amnesia and kneejerk outrage.