4 ms·

Many big companies that are supposed to thing long term seem to be having "strategic leaders" going "I'll be a success in 2023" If I can claimed to have cut N

Many big companies that are supposed to thing long term seem to be having "strategic leaders" going "I'll be a success in 2023" If I can claimed to have cut N costs, no matter how. I know it sounds hiperbolic but when you remember how, in order to manage, many people in upper management end up focusing on few metrics that mean success or failure, then it's very easy to see how the individual careers of those positions can hurt the long term with these "quick wins". It's not particularly surprising at this point in the year but will still be grating the next time you hear the propaganda.

anonylizard 3y ago
High interest rates = cut costs now. That's literally how monetary policy is supposed to work, if economy is overheating with inflation, you force companies to cut costs with high rates. It discounts future revenue, making immediate costs way more important.
- isaacremuant 3y ago
  Notice that my problem is not cutting costs per se but that it's the only metric looked with no analysis of long term impact. It's the nuclear and daft option instead of actually becoming more efficient. If an incompetent guy fires the competent people and calls it success because they saved X on salaries and ignored the myriad of cost cutting alternatives because he doesn't really understand the domain problems except "less cost" then it's not really "how things are supposed to work". Easy to claim that the ones who do it are in authority therefore they're right but then that means every gov out there is right in whatever they do.
  - geodel 3y ago
    > with no analysis of long term impact. And how do you know for sure what analysis was done or not? > Easy to claim that the ones who do it are in authority therefore they're right but then that means every gov out there is right in whatever they do. Well its similarly easy to say all competent people never be laid-off/fired when you are not the one paying their salaries.
    - isaacremuant 3y ago
      > And how do you know for sure what analysis was done or not? This authortiarian mindset of "trust them" is hard to argue with. I have my information due to the context I'm in and the people I know and the context they are in. It's like when you talk politics and you know some things despite not literally being in the room. You know a lot of examples where things work in these local minima for one person way instead of something else. >> Easy to claim that the ones who do it are in authority therefore they're right but then that means every gov out there is right in whatever they do. >Well its similarly easy to say all competent people never be laid-off/fired when you are not the one paying their salaries. Lol. The people who fire then don't pay their salaries either. It's like you're confusing a medium business with these huge corporations. I'm not gonna argue with you because there's clear signs pointing towards what I say and you're coming at me as if I was some sort of teen wanting free stuff and you're advocating for "the guy who puts the money and takes the risk". You're missing the point of the type of huge companies we are talking about.

anonylizard 3y ago

High interest rates = cut costs now. That's literally how monetary policy is supposed to work, if economy is overheating with inflation, you force companies to cut costs with high rates. It discounts future revenue, making immediate costs way more important.

isaacremuant 3y ago
Notice that my problem is not cutting costs per se but that it's the only metric looked with no analysis of long term impact. It's the nuclear and daft option instead of actually becoming more efficient. If an incompetent guy fires the competent people and calls it success because they saved X on salaries and ignored the myriad of cost cutting alternatives because he doesn't really understand the domain problems except "less cost" then it's not really "how things are supposed to work". Easy to claim that the ones who do it are in authority therefore they're right but then that means every gov out there is right in whatever they do.
- geodel 3y ago
  > with no analysis of long term impact. And how do you know for sure what analysis was done or not? > Easy to claim that the ones who do it are in authority therefore they're right but then that means every gov out there is right in whatever they do. Well its similarly easy to say all competent people never be laid-off/fired when you are not the one paying their salaries.
  - isaacremuant 3y ago
    > And how do you know for sure what analysis was done or not? This authortiarian mindset of "trust them" is hard to argue with. I have my information due to the context I'm in and the people I know and the context they are in. It's like when you talk politics and you know some things despite not literally being in the room. You know a lot of examples where things work in these local minima for one person way instead of something else. >> Easy to claim that the ones who do it are in authority therefore they're right but then that means every gov out there is right in whatever they do. >Well its similarly easy to say all competent people never be laid-off/fired when you are not the one paying their salaries. Lol. The people who fire then don't pay their salaries either. It's like you're confusing a medium business with these huge corporations. I'm not gonna argue with you because there's clear signs pointing towards what I say and you're coming at me as if I was some sort of teen wanting free stuff and you're advocating for "the guy who puts the money and takes the risk". You're missing the point of the type of huge companies we are talking about.