6 ms·

IBM left my once prosperous hometown as a kid. Others followed suit. Since then it's been in a sad state economically, just some rust belt town. Corporations ab

IBM left my once prosperous hometown as a kid. Others followed suit. Since then it's been in a sad state economically, just some rust belt town. Corporations abandoning communities is hardly anything new. Capital acts with 0 empathy, or rather, the people who direct it do. I've heard on this forum of a tactic Intel employed where they broke off some people into a subsidiary, dissolved the subsidiary, and then offered to rehire them with the caveat: Oops, the pension you were promised is now gone. Then Intel's foundry business started failing. Oops!!

raverbashing 1y ago
It feels like these older companies had more of "let's open a campus in flyover country" or at least medium sized cities The newer "web 2.0" companies (and I mean, even Google and Amazon) opened shop in more affluent places
- chartered_stack 1y ago
  I'd argue it's not a choice of "let's open a campus in flyover country," but a reflection of how the industry has changed. The "older" companies were manufacturers. Even places like Mountain View and San Jose were the working-class towns with HP factories and semiconductor plants. The concentration of engineering talent (HP/Intel/Apple/Atari) is what created the affluence, especially after manufacturing itself was outsourced globally. The newer Web 2.0 companies don't make physical things; they make software. Their most critical infrastructure isn't a factory but a dense network of developers. They go to the Bay Area, Seattle, etc., because that's where the network is. For the parts of their business that don't require that network, like customer service, they locate in less expensive regions, just as PayPal did with Nebraska. They were even the second largest employer in Nebraska iirc.
  - sugarpimpdorsey 1y ago
    Amazon's customer service HQ is in West Virginia IIRC.
- Arainach 1y ago
  There's a significant overlap between well educated technical minds who you want to do information work and people who want to live in a vibrant city. This isn't new and it shouldn't be shocking.
  - aydyn 1y ago
    [flagged]
    - barrkel 1y ago
      Metropolises are not soulless, as a rule. They are dynamic and exciting, with an influx of ambitious young people every year trying their best to start something. You don't need a big home space when any cafe can become your living room, any restaurant your kitchen, dining room and wait staff, and any park your professionally tended garden. Your choice of entertainment, especially live entertainment, is mainly limited by your willingness to keep up with what's going on, and not by the sparse calendar of touring acts. Metropolises are fantastic places to live, especially when you are comfortable spending money to expand your space on demand.
      - aydyn 1y ago
        Lets say pay was the same and magically commute was the same too. You would choose a literal pod over half an acre only 75 miles away? Insane. Enjoy your pod. And all the crime too.
        raverbashing 1y ago
        Not everybody is autistic, you know I gladly pay a lot of money to be in the center of things
        aydyn 1y ago
        You know you can drive there too right? On the other hand, you dont get to live in an actual house. Its sort of like an insect hive.
- HPsquared 1y ago
  They are working on a different planning time horizon. The older established companies would have a 10-20 year plan which is enough time for diffusion and growth of talent. Startups (unless really well-financed) think more in terms of the next 1-2 years, not enough time for the local community to grow around the company.
- asoneth 1y ago
  If only one company offers jobs in your profession or skill set, that company has a labor monopsony. Back when companies provided lifetime job security and pensions, moving to a remote corporate campus might have been a reasonable tradeoff to consider -- your reduced negotiating leverage would depress your wages but that might have been offset by the lower cost of living (e.g. housing). But modern skilled workers know how risky it is to put down roots in a place where they only have a couple employment options. So companies struggle to attract talent to remote areas and end up needing to hire in places that already have an established pool of skilled labor, which is typically in the cities and more affluent areas of the state or country. In this case, the lack of employment options means many of the engineers laid off by Intel will end up needing to uproot their families' lives and move to a new city or state to find a new employer who can to pay for their skills.
- Yeul 1y ago
  This is what I never understood about Americans. In my country people want to live in civilization- you can't just move your company to redneck land out in the boonies! These are highly educated liberals for crying out they want a hipster Uyghur restaurant not a McDrive.
  - jollyllama 1y ago
    For some of us, there's more to life than what we consume.
  - SJC_Hacker 1y ago
    In their 20s sure. When they start having kids, things like affordable housing come into play.
jahewson 1y ago
> “I don’t feel good today,” Gelsinger said told employees Thursday. “I’ve agonized over today for the last three, four weeks. Many nights waking up at 2 a.m. because I know that what we do, and how we’re affecting you and your families, it matters.” Sounds pretty empathetic to me. I’m guessing he also has empathy for Wall St and his shareholders. Ultimately Intel has no choice but to either grow or downsize and the former hasn’t materialized. They’re losing market share and revenue and if they keep that up they will be empathizing with their creditors and the bank.
- smolder 1y ago
  Honestly, I don't think Gelsinger is a bad guy. He was handed a mess made by others before him, which in my mind absolves him of some of the blame.
  - A_D_E_P_T 1y ago
    Krzanich and Swan were catastrophically bad. Both of them are among the worst bigcorp CEOs ever, with asleep-at-the-wheel Krzanich in the running for the worst of all time. Intel's board tried to right the ship with Gelsinger, but it was too little and too late, especially given slow development cycles in the semiconductor industry.
    - psunavy03 1y ago
      It's arguably a challenge to supplant Jack Welch as "worst of all time" after he not only ran GE into the ground, but also started the whole "celebrity CEO" fad and spewed a bunch of toxic crap that poisoned scads of other companies. Rank-and-yank being first among those.
    - DebtDeflation 1y ago
      The one constant through Intel's almost two decade long downfall across multiple CEOs has been the BOARD. At what point do they get assigned blame?
- sharpy 1y ago
justinclift 1y ago
That sounds like the kind of tactic IBM would do too.
y-curious 1y ago
Are you from the 607? I left there for the Bay Area and never looked back, nice to see someone else from there :)
aunty_helen 1y ago
As a business you get to pick and choose your battles. There’s only so much empathy you can have and stay afloat. What most people forget is at the point they’re doing layoffs, that time has probably passed.

raverbashing 1y ago

It feels like these older companies had more of "let's open a campus in flyover country" or at least medium sized cities The newer "web 2.0" companies (and I mean, even Google and Amazon) opened shop in more affluent places

chartered_stack 1y ago
I'd argue it's not a choice of "let's open a campus in flyover country," but a reflection of how the industry has changed. The "older" companies were manufacturers. Even places like Mountain View and San Jose were the working-class towns with HP factories and semiconductor plants. The concentration of engineering talent (HP/Intel/Apple/Atari) is what created the affluence, especially after manufacturing itself was outsourced globally. The newer Web 2.0 companies don't make physical things; they make software. Their most critical infrastructure isn't a factory but a dense network of developers. They go to the Bay Area, Seattle, etc., because that's where the network is. For the parts of their business that don't require that network, like customer service, they locate in less expensive regions, just as PayPal did with Nebraska. They were even the second largest employer in Nebraska iirc.
- sugarpimpdorsey 1y ago
  Amazon's customer service HQ is in West Virginia IIRC.
Arainach 1y ago
There's a significant overlap between well educated technical minds who you want to do information work and people who want to live in a vibrant city. This isn't new and it shouldn't be shocking.
- aydyn 1y ago
  [flagged]
  - barrkel 1y ago
    Metropolises are not soulless, as a rule. They are dynamic and exciting, with an influx of ambitious young people every year trying their best to start something. You don't need a big home space when any cafe can become your living room, any restaurant your kitchen, dining room and wait staff, and any park your professionally tended garden. Your choice of entertainment, especially live entertainment, is mainly limited by your willingness to keep up with what's going on, and not by the sparse calendar of touring acts. Metropolises are fantastic places to live, especially when you are comfortable spending money to expand your space on demand.
    - aydyn 1y ago
      Lets say pay was the same and magically commute was the same too. You would choose a literal pod over half an acre only 75 miles away? Insane. Enjoy your pod. And all the crime too.
      - raverbashing 1y ago
        Not everybody is autistic, you know I gladly pay a lot of money to be in the center of things
        aydyn 1y ago
        You know you can drive there too right? On the other hand, you dont get to live in an actual house. Its sort of like an insect hive.
HPsquared 1y ago
They are working on a different planning time horizon. The older established companies would have a 10-20 year plan which is enough time for diffusion and growth of talent. Startups (unless really well-financed) think more in terms of the next 1-2 years, not enough time for the local community to grow around the company.
asoneth 1y ago
If only one company offers jobs in your profession or skill set, that company has a labor monopsony. Back when companies provided lifetime job security and pensions, moving to a remote corporate campus might have been a reasonable tradeoff to consider -- your reduced negotiating leverage would depress your wages but that might have been offset by the lower cost of living (e.g. housing). But modern skilled workers know how risky it is to put down roots in a place where they only have a couple employment options. So companies struggle to attract talent to remote areas and end up needing to hire in places that already have an established pool of skilled labor, which is typically in the cities and more affluent areas of the state or country. In this case, the lack of employment options means many of the engineers laid off by Intel will end up needing to uproot their families' lives and move to a new city or state to find a new employer who can to pay for their skills.
Yeul 1y ago
This is what I never understood about Americans. In my country people want to live in civilization- you can't just move your company to redneck land out in the boonies! These are highly educated liberals for crying out they want a hipster Uyghur restaurant not a McDrive.
- jollyllama 1y ago
  For some of us, there's more to life than what we consume.
- SJC_Hacker 1y ago
  In their 20s sure. When they start having kids, things like affordable housing come into play.

jahewson 1y ago

> “I don’t feel good today,” Gelsinger said told employees Thursday. “I’ve agonized over today for the last three, four weeks. Many nights waking up at 2 a.m. because I know that what we do, and how we’re affecting you and your families, it matters.” Sounds pretty empathetic to me. I’m guessing he also has empathy for Wall St and his shareholders. Ultimately Intel has no choice but to either grow or downsize and the former hasn’t materialized. They’re losing market share and revenue and if they keep that up they will be empathizing with their creditors and the bank.

smolder 1y ago
Honestly, I don't think Gelsinger is a bad guy. He was handed a mess made by others before him, which in my mind absolves him of some of the blame.
- A_D_E_P_T 1y ago
  Krzanich and Swan were catastrophically bad. Both of them are among the worst bigcorp CEOs ever, with asleep-at-the-wheel Krzanich in the running for the worst of all time. Intel's board tried to right the ship with Gelsinger, but it was too little and too late, especially given slow development cycles in the semiconductor industry.
  - psunavy03 1y ago
    It's arguably a challenge to supplant Jack Welch as "worst of all time" after he not only ran GE into the ground, but also started the whole "celebrity CEO" fad and spewed a bunch of toxic crap that poisoned scads of other companies. Rank-and-yank being first among those.
  - DebtDeflation 1y ago
    The one constant through Intel's almost two decade long downfall across multiple CEOs has been the BOARD. At what point do they get assigned blame?
sharpy 1y ago

justinclift 1y ago

That sounds like the kind of tactic IBM would do too.

y-curious 1y ago

Are you from the 607? I left there for the Bay Area and never looked back, nice to see someone else from there :)

aunty_helen 1y ago

As a business you get to pick and choose your battles. There’s only so much empathy you can have and stay afloat. What most people forget is at the point they’re doing layoffs, that time has probably passed.