I don't get your hyperbolic angle that pushing back against Elon Musk is society destroying. I agree that Twitter was bloated with benefits, but this was the i

I don't get your hyperbolic angle that pushing back against Elon Musk is society destroying. I agree that Twitter was bloated with benefits, but this was the industry's rewarding of their labor aristocrats. It's unfair against anyone who couldn't make it there (like me too) but this is how the industry retained talent so far. Now these benefits are being taken away. This may be fair to everyone else in the industry, and this is something big tech was already looking to cut during this economic turmoil. Now this is the real point of contention with Elon Musk. Anyone who's left after morale exhausting job cuts is going to be worked to the bone. They have been enjoying benefits that they don't have anymore, but the wider industry also does not work people this hard. Is it fair that the best companies should work their people this hard? At the very least this may return results quickly in the short-term to pay off the debt from buying Twitter, but how sustainable is this? Amazon Warehouses are the best in delivering packages quick, but they churn through workers through harsh conditions and they are running out of a labor pool to recruit from. Would Twitter be able to retain talent in the long run? Should the entire industry be run like this? This then gets to the broader question of the recent societal trend you have been seeing. It's really a collective response to the question of whether society is taking care of the people working for keep it going. The answer for a lot of people is that society has been taking more and more from them. Their wages largely haven't been keeping up with increases in productively. Newer generations are being less economically involved than older ones. A foreign adverse nation does not have to be involved when the nation is already rotting from the inside and people can smell it.