> Note that I’m not commenting on how high performers are doing in terms of getting new jobs! It could be bad, it could be good, I don’t know. > But layoffs wi

> Note that I’m not commenting on how high performers are doing in terms of getting new jobs! It could be bad, it could be good, I don’t know. > But layoffs with less worker protections have always been the trade-off for higher compensation for top performers. We'll have to wait and see how this play out in order to validate your statement. Will the days of top-compn for high-performers come back again? Or are we heading for correction? Hi-tech high-compn is one factor of inflation that bleeds to housing sector (see property prices in hi-tech dense area). My other argument would be nobody can be LeBron James: high-performer for 20+ years consistently. Some only did for one stretch (3-5 years, or just in one company; different companies have different problems and organizational challenges), some longer (10 maybe, if they're lucky). Burnout is real in hi-tech. Nobody has done any data or correlation between high-performers, top compensation, and burnout. I see your angle "if it's a well understood risk" a.k.a making a deal with the devil ;). Having said that, I'd like to see how things play out rather than using previous state of the hi-tech high-compn culture that exist thanks to cheap money via US printing machine.