Oh yeah, this is definitely part of “keeping the pay down” but that’s not really new.
this post was submitted on 31 Mar 2024
66 points (97.1% liked)
Anti-Corporate Movement
409 readers
1 users here now
This community is the first one on lemmy of its kind. It sits between the idea of anarchism/anti-capitalism and left leaning economic policy.
Our goal is to make people aware of the dangers of corporate control, its influence on governments and people as well as the small but steady abrasion of empathy around the world indirectly caused by it.
Current topics this includes but is not limited to:
- Meta's entry into the fediverse
- Game companies putting gambling mechanics in childrens games
- Embracer groups buyout and closing of smaller game studios
- IP trolls destroying small companies and keeping progress back for profit
Feel free to debate this but beware, corporate rhetoric is not welcome here. If you have arguments, bring them on. If its rhetoric trying to defend the evil actions of corporations, we will know and you will go.
Our declared goal so far is to have all companies and individuals worldwide capped at 999 mil USD in all assets, including ownership of other companies, sister companies and marital assets. The reason for this is that companies (and individuals) are not supposed to resemble small(?) countries with a single leader(-board) and shareholder primacy. Thats why we feel like they must be kept in check indefinitely.
But companies will just wander off The argument that large companies will just wander off is valid, which we embrace. We dont need microsoft, apple, google, amazon and other trillion dollar companies. There are small competitors being kept small and driven into brankruptcy by anti competitive behavior of these giants or simply bought up and closed. If starbucks left tomorrow, we would not have an issue with this.
But then we have x little microsofts that all belong to the same person(s) If in fact nobody was allowed to accumulate more than 999 mil in assets, they would not be able to own all these. And like defending agains burglary, it is not about complete defence but time and effort. You only have to keep the thief occupied long enough for them to be caught, give up or make a mistake.
But these giants have tons of IP which would then limit our growth Thats another topic we must touch on. We will (only this one time) take a page out of russias playbook and demand that IP of non complying companies (assets over 999 mil USD) will be declared invalid, which opens them up to be copied.
But then they will "live" in one country that doesnt accept this Correct, and they should be taken into custody the moment they enter the airspace of a country that supports this act.
founded 7 months ago
MODERATORS
I think these things are cyclical. There were significant tech layoffs at the end of the dot-com boom in the early 2000s. I believe there were layoffs in 2008 as well, but that was economy-wide.
Companies are always looking for advantages, so you aren't wrong, but I'm not sure this is an outlier in the industry.
I also think that Covid resulted in a lot of corporate tech spending, tech investing and consumer tech purchasing. Now people are going dragged back into the office and people arent desperately trying to make not leaving the house fun. There was an artificial pump to the industry that a lot of people were hoping would be ongoing or a much slower taper than it has been.
A lot of it also has to do with the pandemic. Tech companies got seriously bloated during the pandemic and now that people are spending money on in person experiences instead of virtual ones, the industry is contracting back to normal.
Jack Welch might not be the first; he’s certainly one of the biggest behind this trend. He’s also usually the one people cite for this. Mass layoffs are a huge part of moving “value” around the economy in ways that got huge in the late 70s and early 80s. The only people to see that “value” are the people who aren’t affected by layoffs.
weew, thanks the strange knowledge have been learnt.
Just another attempt in a very long chain of failed experiments to create automatons by removing the human factor from a human work force.
Tech corps likely reaching saturation so they are now optimizing which comes with getting rid of people and making left overseas pick up the slack.
There is but so much shit any one person can consume realistically physically or digital.
Depends on the industry. They are all different.
At the end of the day employees are overhead and once of the easiest to adjust. I would say it's gotten worse but not significantly. I would also say it used to be more reactionary (most of my career has been in and around mfg environments) and now it's simply a tool to pad the ledger.