7 ms·

It only "worked" because the key personnel decided to come back. Had they decided to move on to greener pastures, the end result would've been very different.

by boricj 2y ago

vasco 2y ago
That isn't much of a point because federal employees are much more likely to return than Twitter technical staff. Interesting approach, specially because it's not my country.
- itronitron 2y ago
  >> federal employees are much more likely to return Not necessarily. It's generally understood that federal employees accept a lower salary in exchange for career stability. If a career as a federal employee now has higher risk then at least some people will be expecting a higher salary.
  - deleted 2y ago
    [deleted]
  - glimshe 2y ago
    The advocates of Musk's firings will say that if these people could command a higher salary, they should be in the private industry producing goods and services for the population rather than the inherently wasteful government positions.
    - throw0101d 2y ago
      > […] they should be in the private industry producing goods and services for the population rather than the inherently wasteful government positions. In this particular case, the government positions were maintaining the US's nuclear arsenal. Not sure how "wasteful" having a nuclear deterrent is.
      - ty6853 2y ago
        Could we privatize the arsenal to increase efficiency?
        johnnyanmac 2y ago
        If you're not joking: what private entity would you trust to not start WW3?
      - pfdietz 2y ago
        The profit-making part is when we pull back from being world policeman and instead sell nuclear weapons and weapon systems. Sorry, we won't go to war for you, but how about some H-bombs, Taiwan?
        johnnyanmac 2y ago
        We're really going to pull a Cuban Missle Crisis again? but x10? I guess they'll be cheered on this time.
    - drawkward 2y ago
      Government work is literally goods and services for the population. This is some serious 1984 war is peace shit.
    - insane_dreamer 2y ago
      Thankfully this isn't the case or you would get the least talented people in government, making it even more ineffective and wasteful.
  - derangedHorse 2y ago
    I think that incentive is part of the problem. Federal employees should get paid more with a reasonable expectation of being fired. The amount of people I know in government positions who give 0 consideration to the quality of their work because they know they won’t be fired astounds me.
    - someothherguyy 2y ago
      How is firing large amounts of people on a whim going to solve the problem of people not caring about their work? From what it sounds like (w.r.t. Agenda 47 / Project 2025) DOGE is fund seeking for massive planned programs, not returning money to the citizenry or restructuring for efficiency. It sounds like they are illegally looting agencies and programs that congress already funded, so they can fund the admin's proposed plans (virtual social cleansing, mass deportations, homeless relocation, freedom cities, etc).
      - roenxi 2y ago
        It doesn't look like DOGE is trying to fund anything; at this stage my guess is they're trying to hack off the propaganda arm of the CIA/NSA and the web of NGOs on the theory that it is funding anti-Trump messaging. Otherwise targeting USAID for savings early is a bit pointless; what is $50 billion a year to the US government? They're $36 trillion in debt with no plausible path out of the hole. Annual deficit is around $2 trillion. Or it might be a propaganda effort to make Team Trump look busy. Hard to say without more visibility into what they're doing.
        someothherguyy 2y ago
        There are some hints toward this, like with recent reporting : https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/congress/house-gop-panel-approves-budget-blueprint-steep-tax-spending-cuts-rcna192002 https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/congress/house-gop-panel-ap... > Rep. Nicole Malliotakis, R-N.Y., said she has expressed “concerns” to leaders about the prospect of steep spending cuts and told reporters that, before she agrees to vote for the budget resolution, she wants “better clarity” about the next stage — especially when it comes to cuts. “$4.5 trillion doesn’t leave a lot of room for the president’s priorities,” Malliotakis said --- Also, why else would you directly reclaim funds as the executive? As a party, if you wanted to correct spending, you would do it in a budget. As the executive, if you wanted to get money without congressional approval, you would reclaim money that has already been appropriated. There are other ways (emergency orders), but they might not be popular with the party or a target voting base (in this case, more net spending).
- pjmlp 2y ago
  The problem with ongoing US "experiments" is how much the rest of the planet is dependent on American companies, related economics and politics, regardless of it not being our country, the schockwaves will be felt.
  - deleted 2y ago
    [deleted]
  - jimnotgym 2y ago
    And this is the thing, the rest of the world has agreed to be dependent on American companies, because they believed in the legitimacy of the US and free international trade. If belief in that legitimacy goes away, we will see that dependence shift quickly. Let us begin with Mastercard and Visa where the US taxes every payment transaction in much of the world. Do we really believe that Europe couldn't run its own card schemes?
    - Aromasin 2y ago
      The European Payment Initiative, the EPI, abandoned its plans for a card scheme and decided to focus on an account-to-account instant payment solution (A2A) for all kinds of use cases, all through a wallet. There is an interesting synergy here with the European moves to develop a common digital identity service and euro-wallet infrastructure. They're not just trying to get rid of the US middleman, but the middleman altogether.
    - numpad0 2y ago
      IMO, to me as layman non-American, it's not an if. The USA is done-for-except-not, just like Twitter has been for a while. This might be able to be undone, hypothetically, but is not being undone. Online armchair generals are already starting to discuss things like escalation strategy for European nuclear forces and so on. I guess we'll be seeing Mastodon/Bluesky/Threads phenomenon across worlds, both horizontally and vertically in the coming decades, this time in real life with (more)real consequences.
    - fxtentacle 2y ago
      Starting with this year, Germany has legally mandated free and instant (few seconds) direct account to account transfers. For some shops, you can now either pay by SEPA (for free) or agree to pay a 3% fee for using VISA. They already started cutting out the US middleman.
adtac 2y ago
> Had they decided to move on Why didn't they?
- sour-taste 2y ago
  H1B
  - adtac 2y ago
    All key personnel were immigrants? Why did the others come back? Also, since the H1B were key to operations and therefore smart, couldn't at least some of them have found a new employer? 61% of the H1B population switched jobs that year, so why did all key H1B come back? I think key personnel came back because they wanted to. It's the simplest explanation.
    - bigmattystyles 2y ago
      With h1b i think you have 60 days to find someone else to sponsor you or you have to leave the country. 60 days is no time at all to find and start a new job. Even if you’re smart.
      - johnnyanmac 2y ago
        Even in the best markets, I still had a 6 week interview to offer stage (5 stages). 45 days and if they decided someone else is better I may be out of luck restarting the process. With a Visa, I would not take such a risk. Given the job market, they either need to extend the period, or somehow mandate companies decide on a full time candidate within 30 days of first conact. It's gotten beyond out of hand.
  - Obscurity4340 2y ago
    What a giant scam the whole program is. Corporations need a good finding out phase again
- jimnotgym 2y ago
  I don't live there, but weren't other tech companies laying off at a similar time?
kelnos 2y ago
Right, but that's all Musk sees: they came back, and so it worked. He seems like the kind of person whose ego would make him believe that any other time he tries this, it would work too.

It only "worked" because the key personnel decided to come back. Had they decided to move on to greener pastures, the end result would've been very different.

by boricj 2y ago

It only "worked" because the key personnel decided to come back. Had they decided to move on to greener pastures, the end result would've been very different.

vasco 2y ago

That isn't much of a point because federal employees are much more likely to return than Twitter technical staff. Interesting approach, specially because it's not my country.

itronitron 2y ago
>> federal employees are much more likely to return Not necessarily. It's generally understood that federal employees accept a lower salary in exchange for career stability. If a career as a federal employee now has higher risk then at least some people will be expecting a higher salary.
- deleted 2y ago
  [deleted]
- glimshe 2y ago
  The advocates of Musk's firings will say that if these people could command a higher salary, they should be in the private industry producing goods and services for the population rather than the inherently wasteful government positions.
  - throw0101d 2y ago
    > […] they should be in the private industry producing goods and services for the population rather than the inherently wasteful government positions. In this particular case, the government positions were maintaining the US's nuclear arsenal. Not sure how "wasteful" having a nuclear deterrent is.
    - ty6853 2y ago
      Could we privatize the arsenal to increase efficiency?
      - johnnyanmac 2y ago
        If you're not joking: what private entity would you trust to not start WW3?
    - pfdietz 2y ago
      The profit-making part is when we pull back from being world policeman and instead sell nuclear weapons and weapon systems. Sorry, we won't go to war for you, but how about some H-bombs, Taiwan?
      - johnnyanmac 2y ago
        We're really going to pull a Cuban Missle Crisis again? but x10? I guess they'll be cheered on this time.
  - drawkward 2y ago
    Government work is literally goods and services for the population. This is some serious 1984 war is peace shit.
  - insane_dreamer 2y ago
    Thankfully this isn't the case or you would get the least talented people in government, making it even more ineffective and wasteful.
- derangedHorse 2y ago
  I think that incentive is part of the problem. Federal employees should get paid more with a reasonable expectation of being fired. The amount of people I know in government positions who give 0 consideration to the quality of their work because they know they won’t be fired astounds me.
  - someothherguyy 2y ago
    How is firing large amounts of people on a whim going to solve the problem of people not caring about their work? From what it sounds like (w.r.t. Agenda 47 / Project 2025) DOGE is fund seeking for massive planned programs, not returning money to the citizenry or restructuring for efficiency. It sounds like they are illegally looting agencies and programs that congress already funded, so they can fund the admin's proposed plans (virtual social cleansing, mass deportations, homeless relocation, freedom cities, etc).
    - roenxi 2y ago
      It doesn't look like DOGE is trying to fund anything; at this stage my guess is they're trying to hack off the propaganda arm of the CIA/NSA and the web of NGOs on the theory that it is funding anti-Trump messaging. Otherwise targeting USAID for savings early is a bit pointless; what is $50 billion a year to the US government? They're $36 trillion in debt with no plausible path out of the hole. Annual deficit is around $2 trillion. Or it might be a propaganda effort to make Team Trump look busy. Hard to say without more visibility into what they're doing.
      - someothherguyy 2y ago
        There are some hints toward this, like with recent reporting : https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/congress/house-gop-panel-approves-budget-blueprint-steep-tax-spending-cuts-rcna192002 https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/congress/house-gop-panel-ap... > Rep. Nicole Malliotakis, R-N.Y., said she has expressed “concerns” to leaders about the prospect of steep spending cuts and told reporters that, before she agrees to vote for the budget resolution, she wants “better clarity” about the next stage — especially when it comes to cuts. “$4.5 trillion doesn’t leave a lot of room for the president’s priorities,” Malliotakis said --- Also, why else would you directly reclaim funds as the executive? As a party, if you wanted to correct spending, you would do it in a budget. As the executive, if you wanted to get money without congressional approval, you would reclaim money that has already been appropriated. There are other ways (emergency orders), but they might not be popular with the party or a target voting base (in this case, more net spending).
pjmlp 2y ago
The problem with ongoing US "experiments" is how much the rest of the planet is dependent on American companies, related economics and politics, regardless of it not being our country, the schockwaves will be felt.
- deleted 2y ago
  [deleted]
- jimnotgym 2y ago
  And this is the thing, the rest of the world has agreed to be dependent on American companies, because they believed in the legitimacy of the US and free international trade. If belief in that legitimacy goes away, we will see that dependence shift quickly. Let us begin with Mastercard and Visa where the US taxes every payment transaction in much of the world. Do we really believe that Europe couldn't run its own card schemes?
  - Aromasin 2y ago
    The European Payment Initiative, the EPI, abandoned its plans for a card scheme and decided to focus on an account-to-account instant payment solution (A2A) for all kinds of use cases, all through a wallet. There is an interesting synergy here with the European moves to develop a common digital identity service and euro-wallet infrastructure. They're not just trying to get rid of the US middleman, but the middleman altogether.
  - numpad0 2y ago
    IMO, to me as layman non-American, it's not an if. The USA is done-for-except-not, just like Twitter has been for a while. This might be able to be undone, hypothetically, but is not being undone. Online armchair generals are already starting to discuss things like escalation strategy for European nuclear forces and so on. I guess we'll be seeing Mastodon/Bluesky/Threads phenomenon across worlds, both horizontally and vertically in the coming decades, this time in real life with (more)real consequences.
  - fxtentacle 2y ago
    Starting with this year, Germany has legally mandated free and instant (few seconds) direct account to account transfers. For some shops, you can now either pay by SEPA (for free) or agree to pay a 3% fee for using VISA. They already started cutting out the US middleman.

adtac 2y ago

> Had they decided to move on Why didn't they?

sour-taste 2y ago
H1B
- adtac 2y ago
  All key personnel were immigrants? Why did the others come back? Also, since the H1B were key to operations and therefore smart, couldn't at least some of them have found a new employer? 61% of the H1B population switched jobs that year, so why did all key H1B come back? I think key personnel came back because they wanted to. It's the simplest explanation.
  - bigmattystyles 2y ago
    With h1b i think you have 60 days to find someone else to sponsor you or you have to leave the country. 60 days is no time at all to find and start a new job. Even if you’re smart.
    - johnnyanmac 2y ago
      Even in the best markets, I still had a 6 week interview to offer stage (5 stages). 45 days and if they decided someone else is better I may be out of luck restarting the process. With a Visa, I would not take such a risk. Given the job market, they either need to extend the period, or somehow mandate companies decide on a full time candidate within 30 days of first conact. It's gotten beyond out of hand.
- Obscurity4340 2y ago
  What a giant scam the whole program is. Corporations need a good finding out phase again
jimnotgym 2y ago
I don't live there, but weren't other tech companies laying off at a similar time?

kelnos 2y ago

Right, but that's all Musk sees: they came back, and so it worked. He seems like the kind of person whose ego would make him believe that any other time he tries this, it would work too.