Meaning 4.8% of the workforce is drawing unemployment benefits. That statistic says nothing about people who have exhausted their benefits, are working part-time, or as temps, or are self-employed but not drawing a paycheck or have given up entirely.
Notice "unemployment" has been at or around 5% for about 300 years? It's a meaningless number. Utterly meaningless.
If I were in a position to have any say in the matter, I wouldn't hire someone with your lousy attitude.
Of course not. Employment isn't about marketable skills. It's about who has the best "attitude." Attitude is measured by how many weekends the new employee plans to work for no pay.
Federal Express does not have any long-haul horsemen or stable hands on its payroll.
Hey, way to patronize. If you'll look waaaaaaaay up at about 40,000 feet, perhaps you'll see the point.
If you are a hard working, college educated person, and haven't been able to establish a big enough safety net to make it to the next job without becoming destitute, it says something about your lack of fiscal responsibility.
Yep. Management never has to justify. Management never has to give a reason. Management is free to fire and steal and ruin careers at their whim while the employee is blamed for being broke.
It is only by the employees' effort that the firm makes money.
If they fire people, they make money.
They do pay them, you know.
Not enough. Wage growth has been stagnant for 30 years.
Not the company's problem.
People wouldn't be buried in debt if they weren't underpaid.
a choice between two employees, the hard-working pro-active one will get kept.
No. They'll both get fired. If you like, I can recite the Disney example again, which perfectly annihilates any and all arguments against the fact that management fires people for no reason at all.
What's there to control?
Every part of an employee's life. From where they live all the way to what development tools they are allowed to use at work.
You keep talking about a major corporation like they can keep paying out money forever.
You talk about employees the same way. This whole discussion is about a $25 billion merger. How many people can $25 billion employ? Now, how many people are getting fired again?
Why are these smart, hard-working people putting themselves into debt?
Because they are underpaid. Major expenses go on the credit card because they can't save anything. They pay confiscatory interest on the credit card (and confiscatory rents, car payments, health insurance and utilities) which exacerbates the problem. Then they GET FIRED EVERY SIX MONTHS which means another several months of no pay. Understand yet, or should I draw a map?
As for walking away from employment agreements, if there is actually an agreement somewhere that says the company will keep the worker on until age 65, then they have to follow it.
No they don't. Pension agreements are being ignored. Why would it bother a company to spend a few years litigating an employment agreement?
If you didn't get it in writing, its not their problem.
You actually think a business is going to obligate themselves to their employees in this economy?
discourage companies from taking risks in new ventures, stop hiring risky employees (like young people), and all in all raise the prices of their products (as the price of employees will have gone up substantially. Oh also you are forcing companies to go and look overseas for employees.
The reason that everything is so "fucked up" is that the world is subject to change. Things aren't nearly stable enough for you to expect to be able to sit in the same place doing the same thing for 40-50 years.
Oh horseshit. Our entire society is set up for people to have a "career" until they retire. Only reason they don't is because business seems to think firing people every 18 months is "good for the economy" which is a euphemism for "good for management."
Most of the pony express riders did a very good job, but I don't see anyone arguing for them to be kept on in an age of electronic telecommunications.
Ever heard of Federal Express?
If they think that profits will increase by reducing staff, then that is what should be done.
Yep. Fire 'em all. Why not cause hard working people to lose their job, home and marriage? Management "thinks" it will increase profits. Increased profits are worth a destroyed home or two, right? Drive that hard-working, college-educated, ambitious guy into alcoholism, financial ruin and divorce. Leave the kids with no family. Uproot entire neighborhoods. Ruin the educations of thousands. Cause all kinds of screaming arguments, hysterical fear and strife. Why not? Hey, it might increase profits! And as we all know, the only important thing in all the wide wide world is profit.
You've got two companies in similar markets here. They both have a lot of people doing very similar things. In an integrated company, there is bound to be some overlap.
So why not train those hard-working, qualified, highly skilled, highly educated employees to do something that DOESN'T overlap? Why is the first option always to FIRE EVERYONE? I know why, of course. It's so management can have a workforce of powerless, hungry, indebted, fearful, easily controlled slaves.
The part where I have to keep on all of my employees, even if they aren't making me money, just because I'm such a nice guy.
Nah. Don't have to keep the employees. Just pay off their debts. Or allow those employees to walk away from their debts as easily as employers walk away from their employment agreements. Anything else is unfair by definition.
You know, the left claims to be the side that embraces change.
You know, the reason everything is so fucked up is because all arguments become "the left" and "the conservatives" and the whatever. Meanwhile, it's perfectly alright for 9,000 people to have their lives rammed into a toilet for doing nothing other than a good job.
There is less of a need for workers at Lucent now than when those workers were hired.
Is there less of a need for house payments?
Why keep someone around doing nothing when they could take part in real production elsewhere?
And the brilliant managers can't come up with something for these people to build? Oh, they have no problem at ALL writing a $25 billion check to buy the place, but they can't seem to pay their employees. Nah. Much easier to just fire everyone and pocket their paychecks. If they can't afford to pay the employees, why are they buying the place?
If you're such a fan of compulsory employment
Please point out the words "compulsory employment" in anything written here?
I know! They got FIRED because they don't have any marketable skills! Right?! Why'd they get hired in the first place? WHY DO THEY ALWAYS HAVE TO FIRE PEOPLE AND FUCK UP THEIR LIVES??
I think there should be a law: if a company that is not in Chapter 7 fires anyone without cause, they should become instantly liable for all of their debts. We'll call it the "Lying Rat Fuck Sphincter Clutch Act" Oh, and it's perfectly fair. Look up "breach of contract." See how many fucking layoff parties happen after that.
Bullshit. Recent mortgages will be the first to go. There's nothing some asscrack lying rat fuck loves more than yanking the paycheck out from under a picket fence. They're fucking over everyone and people actually sit here and say "oh it's the free market."
$25 billion? That should be good for at least ten thousand layoffs. Middle managers are right now compliing lists of people who just bought homes or just re-financed. Hey, Bob over there just got a new car! Oh yeah, he's out with the first group.
Layoffs for all! Bonuses and parties for the rest! THERE'S CAKE IN THE CONFERENCE ROOM!
Yeah they did. Apple is the best. Everywhere Apple chooses to compete, they build a better product which confounds both their competition and the "tech media." The tech media wants so very badly to declare Windows or Sony or Xbox or Disney or Nokia or somebody, ANYBODY the ultimate winner of all media. But they can't.
Er... Isn't that exactly what Jobs is saying by having private file formats and DRM?
Nope. Apple doesn't have a monopoly. They simply have no competition. The reason they have no competition is because other companies spend their time whining instead of building a better product.
Waah! We want total control and Apple won't let us!
Waah! Competition is too risky! We want a monopoly instead!
Of course, these are the exact same people who probably said "it'll never work" when the first mp3 players were announced. And they said "it'll never work" when Apple built iTunes. And they said "it'll never work" when Apple said they would make money on digital music. And they said "it'll never work" when Apple put it all together with OS X and the Mac and made the best computer system on the market, period.
The proof that you're wrong is that they were let go.
That's begging the question (the correct definition). You seem to believe that any management decision is automatically right and further, actually defines its own conditions of accuracy. That's utter nonsense, and it leaves employees with absolutely no reliable frame of reference upon which to construct any remote possibility of job security. Capitalism is supposed to be about a free market. But employees have no way to create supply, because management is free to arbitrarily and capriciously demand something more, something else, or nothing at all on a whim and then make it the employee's fault by claiming they lack "marketable skills" which are never specified.
It takes decades for employees to learn the skills business claims they need. In this economy, it takes management a few minutes to destroy a career. How are people supposed to sign a mortgage and raise a family when business is free to destroy their paycheck on a moment's notice for no reason at all?
I would imagine the animation business is really in quite a difficult place right now.
It is in the U.S.
meanwhile you're still doing things they way they've been done but you haven't had a really big hit in a while
Japan has been doing animation pretty much the same way for over 40 years. They're winning Academy Awards, getting top ratings as a matter of routine, and generating insurmountable revenues. Manga and anime dominate the bookstores, cable channels, DVD sales, merchandising, video games and influence animation in nearly every foreign market. They don't have to compete with Pixar. The revenues from anime and manga are so huge Pixar's entire creative output shrinks to total insignificance in comparison.
Why is the anime and manga industry doing so well? Simple. They support their amateurs, and they don't fire their professionals.
You yourself say "THEY" and are talking about hundreds or thousands of people. That is, by definition, a commodity.
There are approximately 1000 Major League Baseball players. Are they a commodity? Employees have to be totally unique in order to keep their job? Everyone has to be Jerry Seinfeld? Everyone has to bat.395? Isn't that just a little unrealistic? Some people would just like to have a job and a paycheck so they can build a home in peace. They don't want to live "The Apprentice."
And Disney animators are not a commodity. Sorry.
but let me tell you something big guy, 50 years ago management treated people at least as bad, often MUCH MUCH MUCH worse.
False. And you know it. My parents' average length of employment was 20 years. Mine is eight months. It is WAY different now than it was 50 years ago.
In 1956 you could be fired or passed over without question
Are you implying that people cannot be fired or passed over without question now? Based on your argument so far, you seem to believe that it is management's perogative to do whatever the fuck they feel like, regardless of the effect on either the employee or the business. According to you, management has no responsibilities at all. Employee lost their job and home? Tough shit. Get more skills. Take a lower paying job. What, you think you've EARNED something because you have a better education than 80% of the population?
Well, management DOES have responsibilities. They have a responsibility to provide stable adequate incomes to their neighbors, because without that basic element, everything else in society goes into a toilet at Mach 3, INCLUDING that company's profits. They're firing their own customers.
It's about ego and moneygrab and fuck everyone else. Nothing more.
You worked more hours, and were paid less (in any adjusted scale)
That's also false. Wage growth now, adjusted for inflation, is zero. From the time my parents bought their first house to their third, their salaries doubled. I knew precisely zero people whose parents were any worse off. Right now, I know one person who is gainfully employed in a full-time job. One.
In fact, over the years that followed 1956, the trend was to send the lowest wage manufacturing jobs overseas, and to lay off factory workers as you replaced them with better machines
That's funny, because in the 50s and 60s, those manufacturing jobs were the reason the standard of living advanced as far as it did. In fact, it was those manufacturing jobs that created the middle class business is now trying their hardest to destroy. It was possible to own a home and raise a family on pretty much any full-time job. Now it's MBA or the highway. I can list two dozen college majors that business would reject out of hand as worthless. Business is wasting the educations of an entire generation of people right now.
Well, a college education is NOT worthless. For a business community that spends all its time whining about being unable to find "qualified" people (whatever the fuck that means), they sure are quick to ignore university educated candidates because they happened to study something the interviewer doesn't understand.
I was told, along with most of the other people I went to school with, that if we got an education and worked hard and got a good job, that we would do as well or better than our parents.
So all of us got educations and worked hard and got good jobs.
And got fired.
This is the first generation in history that will do worse than the generation that preceded it. And the reason is that business just doesn't want to pay for their profits.
Other than basic human rights, nobody deserves anything.
If that is true (it isn't), then this entire discussion is absurd.
The animators "deserve" exactly what they bargained for in exchange for doing the work.
They can do no wrong can they? According to you, firing someone is always the right decision. You're actually going to defend the wholesale destruction of an entire industry and the thousands it employed. I'm appalled.
or is percieved as one by the people who pay you
Even if they are wrong...
If you are one of a thousand people doing exactly the same thing in a company, and there are a thousand more who can do it also; then unless you can convince someone that YOU PERSONALLY can do it better, you're a commodity.
No, that's absolutely false. You just said so. Even if they PERCEIVE the employee to be a commodity, accurately or not, they're out on their ass. Even if they know FACTUALLY that the employee can do it better, THEY FIRE THEM ANYWAY.
THAT is my point.
Yes, but find me any other system that is as productive, feeds as many people, grows economies as well.
Same system, fifty years ago, when management didn't treat people like dogshit.
To save your job, don't be a commodity.
It doesn't matter. These people were the ultimate anti-commodity; The best in the world, engineers of billion dollar markets and carrying the excellence of an 80 year tradition, and they got fired anyway.
But also having been on both sides of the issue, there are no small amount of people who are essentially monoskilled individuals, relied on one limited skillset and frankly have no idea how business, the world or even their own industry runs.
So instead of training them, they should be remorselessly fired and have their lives destroyed, right?
Slashdot Mirror
where's your source?
Bureau of Labor Statistics.
NEXT!
As of February 2006, unemployment was at 4.8%.
Meaning 4.8% of the workforce is drawing unemployment benefits. That statistic says nothing about people who have exhausted their benefits, are working part-time, or as temps, or are self-employed but not drawing a paycheck or have given up entirely.
Notice "unemployment" has been at or around 5% for about 300 years? It's a meaningless number. Utterly meaningless.
If I were in a position to have any say in the matter, I wouldn't hire someone with your lousy attitude.
Of course not. Employment isn't about marketable skills. It's about who has the best "attitude." Attitude is measured by how many weekends the new employee plans to work for no pay.
Federal Express does not have any long-haul horsemen or stable hands on its payroll.
Hey, way to patronize. If you'll look waaaaaaaay up at about 40,000 feet, perhaps you'll see the point.
If you are a hard working, college educated person, and haven't been able to establish a big enough safety net to make it to the next job without becoming destitute, it says something about your lack of fiscal responsibility.
Yep. Management never has to justify. Management never has to give a reason. Management is free to fire and steal and ruin careers at their whim while the employee is blamed for being broke.
It is only by the employees' effort that the firm makes money.
If they fire people, they make money.
They do pay them, you know.
Not enough. Wage growth has been stagnant for 30 years.
Not the company's problem.
People wouldn't be buried in debt if they weren't underpaid.
a choice between two employees, the hard-working pro-active one will get kept.
No. They'll both get fired. If you like, I can recite the Disney example again, which perfectly annihilates any and all arguments against the fact that management fires people for no reason at all.
What's there to control?
Every part of an employee's life. From where they live all the way to what development tools they are allowed to use at work.
You keep talking about a major corporation like they can keep paying out money forever.
You talk about employees the same way. This whole discussion is about a $25 billion merger. How many people can $25 billion employ? Now, how many people are getting fired again?
Why are these smart, hard-working people putting themselves into debt?
Because they are underpaid. Major expenses go on the credit card because they can't save anything. They pay confiscatory interest on the credit card (and confiscatory rents, car payments, health insurance and utilities) which exacerbates the problem. Then they GET FIRED EVERY SIX MONTHS which means another several months of no pay. Understand yet, or should I draw a map?
As for walking away from employment agreements, if there is actually an agreement somewhere that says the company will keep the worker on until age 65, then they have to follow it.
No they don't. Pension agreements are being ignored. Why would it bother a company to spend a few years litigating an employment agreement?
If you didn't get it in writing, its not their problem.
You actually think a business is going to obligate themselves to their employees in this economy?
discourage companies from taking risks in new ventures, stop hiring risky employees (like young people), and all in all raise the prices of their products (as the price of employees will have gone up substantially. Oh also you are forcing companies to go and look overseas for employees.
All of that is happening now.
can you say "20%+ unemployment,"
Fifty percent of working-age adults in the U.S. are not employed in full-time "permanent" jobs.
Fifty.
Percent.
If you make it impossible to fire potentially shiftless/lazy employees
Shiftless/lazy employee: Anyone who is not a powerless, hungry, indebted, fearful, easily controlled slave.
to sidestep that problem by simply not hiring them in the first place.
Yep. Employers get the guarantees. Employees get the debts. Unfair.
The reason that everything is so "fucked up" is that the world is subject to change. Things aren't nearly stable enough for you to expect to be able to sit in the same place doing the same thing for 40-50 years.
Oh horseshit. Our entire society is set up for people to have a "career" until they retire. Only reason they don't is because business seems to think firing people every 18 months is "good for the economy" which is a euphemism for "good for management."
Most of the pony express riders did a very good job, but I don't see anyone arguing for them to be kept on in an age of electronic telecommunications.
Ever heard of Federal Express?
If they think that profits will increase by reducing staff, then that is what should be done.
Yep. Fire 'em all. Why not cause hard working people to lose their job, home and marriage? Management "thinks" it will increase profits. Increased profits are worth a destroyed home or two, right? Drive that hard-working, college-educated, ambitious guy into alcoholism, financial ruin and divorce. Leave the kids with no family. Uproot entire neighborhoods. Ruin the educations of thousands. Cause all kinds of screaming arguments, hysterical fear and strife. Why not? Hey, it might increase profits! And as we all know, the only important thing in all the wide wide world is profit.
You've got two companies in similar markets here. They both have a lot of people doing very similar things. In an integrated company, there is bound to be some overlap.
So why not train those hard-working, qualified, highly skilled, highly educated employees to do something that DOESN'T overlap? Why is the first option always to FIRE EVERYONE? I know why, of course. It's so management can have a workforce of powerless, hungry, indebted, fearful, easily controlled slaves.
The part where I have to keep on all of my employees, even if they aren't making me money, just because I'm such a nice guy.
Nah. Don't have to keep the employees. Just pay off their debts. Or allow those employees to walk away from their debts as easily as employers walk away from their employment agreements. Anything else is unfair by definition.
Nobody would hire anybody
People get hired now? Where?
You know, the left claims to be the side that embraces change.
You know, the reason everything is so fucked up is because all arguments become "the left" and "the conservatives" and the whatever. Meanwhile, it's perfectly alright for 9,000 people to have their lives rammed into a toilet for doing nothing other than a good job.
There is less of a need for workers at Lucent now than when those workers were hired.
Is there less of a need for house payments?
Why keep someone around doing nothing when they could take part in real production elsewhere?
And the brilliant managers can't come up with something for these people to build? Oh, they have no problem at ALL writing a $25 billion check to buy the place, but they can't seem to pay their employees. Nah. Much easier to just fire everyone and pocket their paychecks. If they can't afford to pay the employees, why are they buying the place?
If you're such a fan of compulsory employment
Please point out the words "compulsory employment" in anything written here?
Apple sold one billion songs.
That's a 'b'
Billion.
Nine zeroes.
Big number. More than a lot. Like, really big number.
Just before iTunes launched everyone said "who's going to pay for something you can get for free?"
Then Apple sold one billion songs.
That's a 'b'
pwnt
Next.
No wait!
I know! They got FIRED because they don't have any marketable skills! Right?! Why'd they get hired in the first place? WHY DO THEY ALWAYS HAVE TO FIRE PEOPLE AND FUCK UP THEIR LIVES??
I think there should be a law: if a company that is not in Chapter 7 fires anyone without cause, they should become instantly liable for all of their debts. We'll call it the "Lying Rat Fuck Sphincter Clutch Act" Oh, and it's perfectly fair. Look up "breach of contract." See how many fucking layoff parties happen after that.
Middle managers will be the first to go.
Bullshit. Recent mortgages will be the first to go. There's nothing some asscrack lying rat fuck loves more than yanking the paycheck out from under a picket fence. They're fucking over everyone and people actually sit here and say "oh it's the free market."
Free market my crotch.
Actually, I think it's "allocate workers and resources in the most efficient manner"
Efficient:
Workers: Out on their ass
Resources: In some hairpiece's pocket.
Allocated.
Apparently Lucent isn't an efficient place to allocate workers to, thus the market has moved them elsewhere.
According to the people who are firing 9,000 workers for no reason.
They've laid off over 100,000 people in the past couple of years, and are now looking at another 9,000 or so with this merger.
Oh yeah. Now that's free market capitalism at it's best! What? No, that's what "free market" means: shit all over the wage earners.
Now they can start figuring out ways to fuck over customers.
Close to 9,000 jobs, or about 10% of the companies' workforce will lose their jobs as a result of the merger.
Any MOTHER FUCKING QUESTIONS?
Thank you.
$25 billion? That should be good for at least ten thousand layoffs. Middle managers are right now compliing lists of people who just bought homes or just re-financed. Hey, Bob over there just got a new car! Oh yeah, he's out with the first group.
Layoffs for all! Bonuses and parties for the rest! THERE'S CAKE IN THE CONFERENCE ROOM!
or because they are best
Yeah they did. Apple is the best. Everywhere Apple chooses to compete, they build a better product which confounds both their competition and the "tech media." The tech media wants so very badly to declare Windows or Sony or Xbox or Disney or Nokia or somebody, ANYBODY the ultimate winner of all media. But they can't.
Because Apple is better, and they know it.
Er... Isn't that exactly what Jobs is saying by having private file formats and DRM?
Nope. Apple doesn't have a monopoly. They simply have no competition. The reason they have no competition is because other companies spend their time whining instead of building a better product.
Apple, meanwhile, just builds better products.
Waah! Apple makes better products!
Waah! Steve Jobs is smarter than us!
Waah! Apple makes it work while we have meetings!
Waah! We want total control and Apple won't let us!
Waah! Competition is too risky! We want a monopoly instead!
Of course, these are the exact same people who probably said "it'll never work" when the first mp3 players were announced. And they said "it'll never work" when Apple built iTunes. And they said "it'll never work" when Apple said they would make money on digital music. And they said "it'll never work" when Apple put it all together with OS X and the Mac and made the best computer system on the market, period.
And, as usual, they were wrong.
The proof that you're wrong is that they were let go.
That's begging the question (the correct definition). You seem to believe that any management decision is automatically right and further, actually defines its own conditions of accuracy. That's utter nonsense, and it leaves employees with absolutely no reliable frame of reference upon which to construct any remote possibility of job security. Capitalism is supposed to be about a free market. But employees have no way to create supply, because management is free to arbitrarily and capriciously demand something more, something else, or nothing at all on a whim and then make it the employee's fault by claiming they lack "marketable skills" which are never specified.
It takes decades for employees to learn the skills business claims they need. In this economy, it takes management a few minutes to destroy a career. How are people supposed to sign a mortgage and raise a family when business is free to destroy their paycheck on a moment's notice for no reason at all?
I would imagine the animation business is really in quite a difficult place right now.
It is in the U.S.
meanwhile you're still doing things they way they've been done but you haven't had a really big hit in a while
Japan has been doing animation pretty much the same way for over 40 years. They're winning Academy Awards, getting top ratings as a matter of routine, and generating insurmountable revenues. Manga and anime dominate the bookstores, cable channels, DVD sales, merchandising, video games and influence animation in nearly every foreign market. They don't have to compete with Pixar. The revenues from anime and manga are so huge Pixar's entire creative output shrinks to total insignificance in comparison.
Why is the anime and manga industry doing so well? Simple. They support their amateurs, and they don't fire their professionals.
Kind of like what business used to do in the U.S.
For a year? A couple of thousands.
Yeah? Who pays that well?
You yourself say "THEY" and are talking about hundreds or thousands of people. That is, by definition, a commodity.
.395? Isn't that just a little unrealistic? Some people would just like to have a job and a paycheck so they can build a home in peace. They don't want to live "The Apprentice."
There are approximately 1000 Major League Baseball players. Are they a commodity? Employees have to be totally unique in order to keep their job? Everyone has to be Jerry Seinfeld? Everyone has to bat
And Disney animators are not a commodity. Sorry.
but let me tell you something big guy, 50 years ago management treated people at least as bad, often MUCH MUCH MUCH worse.
False. And you know it. My parents' average length of employment was 20 years. Mine is eight months. It is WAY different now than it was 50 years ago.
In 1956 you could be fired or passed over without question
Are you implying that people cannot be fired or passed over without question now? Based on your argument so far, you seem to believe that it is management's perogative to do whatever the fuck they feel like, regardless of the effect on either the employee or the business. According to you, management has no responsibilities at all. Employee lost their job and home? Tough shit. Get more skills. Take a lower paying job. What, you think you've EARNED something because you have a better education than 80% of the population?
Well, management DOES have responsibilities. They have a responsibility to provide stable adequate incomes to their neighbors, because without that basic element, everything else in society goes into a toilet at Mach 3, INCLUDING that company's profits. They're firing their own customers.
It's about ego and moneygrab and fuck everyone else. Nothing more.
You worked more hours, and were paid less (in any adjusted scale)
That's also false. Wage growth now, adjusted for inflation, is zero. From the time my parents bought their first house to their third, their salaries doubled. I knew precisely zero people whose parents were any worse off. Right now, I know one person who is gainfully employed in a full-time job. One.
In fact, over the years that followed 1956, the trend was to send the lowest wage manufacturing jobs overseas, and to lay off factory workers as you replaced them with better machines
That's funny, because in the 50s and 60s, those manufacturing jobs were the reason the standard of living advanced as far as it did. In fact, it was those manufacturing jobs that created the middle class business is now trying their hardest to destroy. It was possible to own a home and raise a family on pretty much any full-time job. Now it's MBA or the highway. I can list two dozen college majors that business would reject out of hand as worthless. Business is wasting the educations of an entire generation of people right now.
Well, a college education is NOT worthless. For a business community that spends all its time whining about being unable to find "qualified" people (whatever the fuck that means), they sure are quick to ignore university educated candidates because they happened to study something the interviewer doesn't understand.
I was told, along with most of the other people I went to school with, that if we got an education and worked hard and got a good job, that we would do as well or better than our parents.
So all of us got educations and worked hard and got good jobs.
And got fired.
This is the first generation in history that will do worse than the generation that preceded it. And the reason is that business just doesn't want to pay for their profits.
I'm pretty sure those 300mill will give work to a lot of people... in the advertising industry.
Uh huh.
From the ZDnet article:
So why are Macs still such a rare site in the enterprise?
Because of incompetent hairpieces in management who wouldn't know a good product if one jumped up their ass.
Or because of humpfuck articles that ask dumbass questions like "why doesn't Apple get a job?"
How many people could $300 million employ?
Hmm...
Other than basic human rights, nobody deserves anything.
If that is true (it isn't), then this entire discussion is absurd.
The animators "deserve" exactly what they bargained for in exchange for doing the work.
They can do no wrong can they? According to you, firing someone is always the right decision. You're actually going to defend the wholesale destruction of an entire industry and the thousands it employed. I'm appalled.
or is percieved as one by the people who pay you
Even if they are wrong...
If you are one of a thousand people doing exactly the same thing in a company, and there are a thousand more who can do it also; then unless you can convince someone that YOU PERSONALLY can do it better, you're a commodity.
No, that's absolutely false. You just said so. Even if they PERCEIVE the employee to be a commodity, accurately or not, they're out on their ass. Even if they know FACTUALLY that the employee can do it better, THEY FIRE THEM ANYWAY.
THAT is my point.
Yes, but find me any other system that is as productive, feeds as many people, grows economies as well.
Same system, fifty years ago, when management didn't treat people like dogshit.
To save your job, don't be a commodity.
It doesn't matter. These people were the ultimate anti-commodity; The best in the world, engineers of billion dollar markets and carrying the excellence of an 80 year tradition, and they got fired anyway.
But also having been on both sides of the issue, there are no small amount of people who are essentially monoskilled individuals, relied on one limited skillset and frankly have no idea how business, the world or even their own industry runs.
So instead of training them, they should be remorselessly fired and have their lives destroyed, right?
Is it the only reason for outsourcing?
The reason for outsourcing is moneygrab.