This might sound naive, but I would like to advocate for more employment than less. Optimizing jobs from 10k to 500 as some people in the thread are advocating seems horrific to me.
The ideal is that you would have 500 people that are efficient enough to perform 20x the work, and optimize the work efficiency, and automate some things.
What I have seen personally is that employers just overload staff. They reach a crisis point and have to hire more people. That just hurts employees and there families.
I do not want to make baseless assumptions on who was laid off. People could be laid off for something as trivial as a site consolidation and the person could not relocate, or an acquisition where multiple people had the similar roles. Using laid off status as a scarlet letter is a worrisome trend and only serves to harm all of us in the long term.
I personally do not want to live in a zero sum economy.
The ideal is that you would have 500 people that are efficient enough to perform 20x the work, and optimize the work efficiency, and automate some things.
What I have seen personally is that employers just overload staff. They reach a crisis point and have to hire more people. That just hurts employees and there families.
I do not want to make baseless assumptions on who was laid off. People could be laid off for something as trivial as a site consolidation and the person could not relocate, or an acquisition where multiple people had the similar roles. Using laid off status as a scarlet letter is a worrisome trend and only serves to harm all of us in the long term.
I personally do not want to live in a zero sum economy.