Slashdot Mirror
Cisco To Slash Up To 6,000 Jobs -- 8% of Its Workforce -- In "Reorganization"
alphadogg (971356) writes Cisco Systems will cut as many as 6,000 jobs over the next 12 months, saying it needs to shift resources to growing businesses such as cloud, software and security. The move will be a reorganization rather than a net reduction, the company said. It needs to cut jobs because the product categories where it sees the strongest growth, such as security, require special skills, so it needs to make room for workers in those areas, it said. 'If we don't have the courage to change, if we don't lead the change, we will be left behind,' Chairman and CEO John Chambers said on a conference call.
thank BAMA! for the CHANGE he promised
They need to shift focus on lowering prices and not letting the NSA spy on people.
Training is impossible because reading is for fags.
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/...
One cannot blame Cisco since, like any company, it will operate at the margin of the law irrespective of the consequences to the national economy. A country's economy is an national strategic asset not a free-for-all playground. Hell, this concept is not anathema to reasonable interpretations of capitalism. A balance must exist between allowing companies to flourish without falling in cannibalism (stakeholder capitalism vs shareholder capitalism kinda thing.)
That balance is lost in this country. Or perhaps it never had it but it was never a problem until globalization and other factors kicked in.
Regardless, this is another reason to tax capital gains the same (or as close) as income. This buy-back (on top of the layoffs) is pretty much a swap from income gains to capital gains which are taxed more favorably.
Or better yet, this is another reason to revamp our entire tax system : close all loopholes (including offshoring ones), lower tax brackets (both capital and income) while broadening the tax base and/or implement a value-added tax, eliminate double taxation, don't penalize companies from moving capital and operations abroad, BUT instead create incentives for *all* companies (national and foreign) to invest locally.
This Cisco thing is just a symptom of a greater malady.
Not to mention OpenSwitch, which Cisco hasn't exactly embraced: http://arstechnica.com/informa... also: http://arstechnica.com/informa...
The NSA screwed over Cisco in a big way (and other American companies, of course): http://arstechnica.com/tech-po...
You can't be ahead of the curve, if you're stuck in a loop.
One cannot blame Cisco since, like any company, it will operate at the margin of the law irrespective of the consequences to the national economy.
To be fair, the country screwed them. The NSA's spying has cost Cisco a lot of money. I expect they will try to move more jobs and manufacturing overseas soon.
const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
Yes, the rich should be paying more back into the economy (through taxes or spending) instead of hoarding wealth, and the H-1Bs and other outsourcing of costs has to be curtailed.
However, when the poor stop getting earned income credits totaling in the several thousands every year (which goes up with the number of children claimed as dependents), while they don't pay a penny in income tax because they're unemployed for whatever reason, then you'll have a solid argument. Until then, too many of the "poor" are getting a free ride on the backs of bad government policy - and they have no skin in the game. Maybe they need to get rid of their iPhones, stop buying $250 Nikes, and cut their cable to pay some taxes back into the system that's paying for those luxuries.
Or you make "I shot the bastard because he was a greedy prick who would screw his mother for $5" an acceptable excuse to tell the judge and jury.
If programs would be read like poetry, most programmers would be Vogons.
Libertarianism is a great idea as long as every actor is altruistic and interested in the welfare of the society above themselves.
Laissez-fair capitalism is a great idea as long as every actor is altruistic and interested in the welfare of the society above themselves.
- wrong and wrong, libertarian and laissez-fair capitalist ideas do not require anybody to be altruistic at all, in fact the entire point is only to think about yourself and in the free market economy to think about yourself means to provide the market with solutions it pays for, thus helping the society not by being altruistic but by chasing profits, which is why free market capitalism is the most moral system - it relies on self interest and the invisible hand of the market rewards self-interest that helps the market.
Your definitions are off-base, no wonder you don't understand what is going on and your conclusions are all screwed up.
You can't handle the truth.