• FishFace@piefed.social
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    11 hours ago

    So then I would say, following this line of thinking, that they are laying people off to reduce costs. Whether to just make a ton of profit, or because other costs are rising, isn’t really the point, because neither explanation is about driving down wages - something that can only be done in collusion with other companies and so is rather far-fetched.

      • FishFace@piefed.social
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        7 hours ago

        Seems like it’d be on a completely different scale, don’t you think?

        What happens if you lay off 5,000 employees but then your competitor goes, “lol sike, I’m keeping mine”? You can’t sue them!

        Compare what happens if you don’t cold call Apple’s employees to poach them and they cold call yours - you can just start again, and only lost however many months of potential new hires.

        • aesthelete@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          edit-2
          6 hours ago

          What I took issue with is your argument that collusion between companies to lower wages was somehow unlikely when it’s already happened before. That doesn’t prove that it’s happening now, but it does disprove your argument that they wouldn’t collude or it’s extremely unlikely.

    • Zachariah@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      10 hours ago

      The same people serve on multiple boards of many of the biggest companies. Not collusion if it’s just the same people. And leaders at smaller companies love mimicking the big guys, so no collusion needed there either.

      • FishFace@piefed.social
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        9 hours ago

        You already stated the real reason. Why do you want there to be a secret bonus reason, one that you have presented no actual evidence for?

        • Zachariah@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          8 hours ago

          We may be agreeing but saying it differently. I’m not saying there’s a secret bonus reason. I think it just works out well in many ways for companies when unemployment is high.