7 ms·
It makes sense that you wouldn't hire in such an uncertain environment. We have a President using emergency powers to affect sweeping, unpredictable, consequent
by mbgerring 9mo ago
It makes sense that you wouldn't hire in such an uncertain environment. We have a President using emergency powers to affect sweeping, unpredictable, consequential changes to the economy that can dramatically alter unit economics overnight and completely tank a previously viable business. Within this calendar year, the President's ability to do this may be upended by pending court cases, an election, or both. Following those potential changes, the breach of trust created by the previous chaos may mean that trade never returns to normal. I don't envy anyone trying to make long-term business decisions, like hiring, in such an environment.
- ojbyrne 9mo agoActually its easy if you're a multinational. You invest outside the United States.
- OGEnthusiast 9mo agoThe US needs an offshoring tax. If you want to sell to Americans you also need to hire Americans.
- toomuchtodo 9mo agoThe HIRE Act: 25% tax on outsourcing - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45161419 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45161419 - September 2025 (19 comments)
- pjc50 9mo agoshrug enjoy paying more taxes for your consumption, I guess.
- toomuchtodo 9mo agoYes, I do want to pay more to bolster my country's domestic workforce vs subsidizing corporate shareholders and offshore workers, while also having that come out of corporate profits. shrug
- vlovich123 9mo agoI hate to break it to you, but corporate profits are rarely affected. They just pass on the costs of the tax directly to the consumer.
- toomuchtodo 9mo agoCool, give me as much statute and regulation required to squeeze companies and encourage competition to drive down profits while protecting workers. This system and game is all arbitrary, we can change the rules (of course, with time and effort). If we have to kill some companies to do this, that's acceptable. As someone wise once said, "We may not always succeed. But never will we be accused of lacking the courage to try."
- vlovich123 9mo agoAre you going to stop at killing corporations? I can imagine a few people might also try to stop you from this people’s revolution you’re envisioning.
- toomuchtodo 9mo agoDemocratic socialists were just recently democratically elected in NYC and Seattle. Support for unions in the US is at historical record highs [1]. ~2M 55+ people in the US die every year, ~5k per day. ~3M people turn 18 every year and become eligible to vote, young people who only see bleakness ahead. 31% of wealth is held by people over 70 [2]. This is a population dynamics story, old ideas die out, new ideas come in (Planck's principle). I'm confident support for worker vs corporate policies is high, based on all available evidence [3] [4] [5]. Sixty percent of Americans cannot afford a basic quality of life on their income [6], as another data point. So, I'm unsure who is in the "pro capitalism pro corporation" corner to be honest, when you consider the wealthiest 10% of Americans own 93% of equities. No harm should come to humans of course, but corporations, entities, and systems are all fair game. [1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45851620 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45851620 (citations) [2] 31% of Wealth Owned by People Over 70 - https://www.apolloacademy.com/31-percent-of-wealth-owned-by-people-over-70/ https://www.apolloacademy.com/31-percent-of-wealth-owned-by-... - December 7th, 2025 [3] The housing crisis is pushing Gen Z into crypto and economic nihilism - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46079617 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46079617 - November 2025 (4 comments) [4] https://www.cato.org/blog/81-say-they-cant-afford-pay-higher-taxes-next-year https://www.cato.org/blog/81-say-they-cant-afford-pay-higher... ("A recent survey by the Cato Institute and YouGov paints a troubling picture: 62 percent of Americans aged 18–29 say they hold a “favorable view” of socialism, and 34 percent say the same of communism.") [5] Why millennials feel hopeless about the economy - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46062082 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46062082 - November 2025 (15 comments) [6] https://www.lisep.org/mql https://www.lisep.org/mql (think in systems)
- deleted 9mo ago[deleted]
- polshaw 9mo agoUS would lose out significantly if this were applied by everyone worldwide. The whole of Europe + Anglosphere have surrendered their whole tech related sectors to US companies, an enormous wealth transfer.
- FuriouslyAdrift 9mo agoMost US tech related companies are actually headquartered in Ireland (for tax purposes)
- magicalist 9mo ago> Most US tech related companies are actually headquartered in Ireland (for tax purposes) Regional headquarters. That helps with their taxes in Europe. It wouldn't work to avoid taxes on money made in the US.
- FuriouslyAdrift 9mo agoYou'd be dead wrong there... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Double_Irish_arrangement https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Double_Irish_arrangement
- femiagbabiaka 9mo agoTrump has made the idea of mafioso politics popular -- where you hold everyone hostage until they do what you want -- but that doesn't actually mean that it's good policy.
- estearum 9mo agoNor is it popular once actually realized. It's mostly for dumbasses to go "rah rah" thinking they'll be at the top of the pyramid. The problem with this form of governance is it puts the most vicious, selfish, and brutal people at the top. Those are rarely the most intelligent and (obviously) never the most magnanimous.
- Tanoc 9mo agoHe has also shown that it isn't a functional policy either. Much of what he's done has backfired almost immediately after it was implemented, but much like a gremlin in a wiring loom by the time the sparks appear he's already moved on to tear out something else important. Mafioso politics only work when your concentrated power is wielded against fragmented power that will move too slowly to mitigate you. Even if there are a multitude of small groups if they turn against you even without unanimous action you're spending too much time and effort jumping from thing to thing to ever actually achieve your intended goals. The end result is a parade of violent whack-a-mole as force is used against the myriad number of small revolts that happen, exhausting the resources of the enforcement infrastructure and normalizing the expectation of violence. Of course the four morons of the broken winds don't see this as a failure, but merely an excuse to normalize that violence until it reaches the extent that they will face little to no consequence when they push it to the logical extreme and attempt to exterminate the many opposing groups rather than simply subjugate them.
- ibejoeb 9mo agoAnyone will tell you I'm not a regulations guy, but there's definitely a problem. When you watch these rounds of seemingly coordinated, sweeping layoffs, followed by H-1B hiring sprees, it's hard to pretend.
- aldebran 9mo agoYou’re misinformed or willingly stupid if you think there are H1 hiring sprees with the last set of changes. H1 hiring has tanked.
- toomuchtodo 9mo agoPlease prove this assertion with a citation to data.
- ibejoeb 9mo agoThis is a real eye-opener. Do you know how to fix how stupid I am? Tell me what's wrong with my analysis. Here's a report: https://www.reuters.com/business/finance/us-lawmakers-scrutinize-tech-firms-over-h-1b-visa-use-amid-other-job-layoffs-wsj-2025-09-25/ https://www.reuters.com/business/finance/us-lawmakers-scruti.... Is it factually wrong that "In the first half of 2025, Amazon and its cloud-computing unit, AWS, received approval for more than 12,000 H-1B visas, while Microsoft and Meta had more than 5,000 H-1B visa approvals each" and that they did layoffs?
- nostrademons 9mo agoIt's hard to see how H-1B hiring could move meaningfully either up or down, given that the number of H-1Bs is capped at 65,000 [1] (+ 20,000 for advanced degrees), no company is going to pay for the process of getting an H-1B visa and not actually hire into it, and if a person on an H-1B loses their job they lose their visa in 60 days. You know exactly how many H-1Bs there are in the country: it's mandated by Congress. What has changed is that they are or will soon be allocated by pay level instead of randomly. That's going to bias hiring toward Big Tech firms like Microsoft and Meta and away from body-shops like Infosys and Wipro. [1] https://www.uscis.gov/working-in-the-united-states/temporary-workers/h-1b-specialty-occupations/h-1b-cap-season https://www.uscis.gov/working-in-the-united-states/temporary...
- hvb2 9mo agoYour fellow Americans disagree, they will buy their stuff from whoever is the cheapest. People need to understand that it matters how they spend. They can't expect everyone else to pay for things to be made in America when they're not willing to themselves.
- Tadpole9181 9mo agoIs that what we said about slavery?
- snakeboy 9mo agoIf you can't reason about the concept of 'price sensitivity' without a slippery-slope invocation of slavery, then I think capitalism isn't for you.
- ben_w 9mo agoYou want to tax foreign businesses that sell stuff to you? Ok, given you can only tax stuff when it passes into your territory what you really have there is called a "tariff", it is paid by… the customer, when they buy the thing. The seller has an entire planet to sell to. The US has about 25% of the money to buy things with, but even then only because we all like your money. Moment we stop liking your money, that probably drops to 20%.
- SilverElfin 9mo agoI’m not sure why this logic isn’t more mainstream. Half the country is clamoring for tariffs, bans on H1Bs, offshoring taxes, etc. They’re not connecting the dots on how this affects innovation, the economy, debt, taxation, etc. Is it a failure of education or a culture of rejecting it?
- morleytj 9mo agoFor the US, it's not too out of the norm historically speaking. Up until relatively recently tariffs were very popular in the US despite the clear understanding by academics that they were incredibly damaging to the economy. Political movements based around protectionist economic arguments have a long history in the US. For an example, take a look at the 1888 US presidential election, which largely revolved around tariffs. Grover Cleveland lost re-election due to being part of the pro-business wing of the Democrats, and he came to the conclusion that tariffs were a negative to the economy overall, while his opponents were strongly protectionist. After McKinley's Republicans won the election on a protectionist platform, he instituted the McKinley tariffs (average import duties of around ~50%), which were devastating to the economy despite being extremely popular with the nation in the election. It led to massive price increases which led to the re-election of Grover Cleveland in 1892 (only other non-consecutive term president aside from Trump). Despite expert opinion being fairly solidified against tariffs even at the time, the idea of "protecting American business" and "punishing other countries for their unequal trade deficits with the US" was pretty popular with specific interest groups! Parts of this sound rather familiar, do they not? I would then argue that it points to a cultural element, out of the two options of a failure of education or a culture of rejecting it. History certainly rhymes on this point.
- trgn 9mo agoalso, future of USD-value is highly uncertain, dropped 10% last year, likely to drop more if interest rates keep dropping
- garbawarb 9mo agoThat makes the US a more compelling place for foreign capital to invest in talent though.
- stackghost 9mo agoIt makes it more attractive for FOREX trading, maybe, but economic instability (which Trump is absolutely fomenting) is anathema to investors.
- trgn 9mo agoLike your optimism
- tick_tock_tick 9mo agoI mean that's a big part of why so many people want the USA dollar to go even lower. The administration has been very explicit that they want a cheaper dollar but unlike a lot of their other polices that goal has a lot of support among economists.
- cco 9mo agoThe administration's target was an additional 20% devaluation or so by next year, they want to devalue by about 30% total
- dwpdwpdwpdwpdwp 9mo agoI work for an global company in the industrial automation space. Not only is there is a major effort underway to offshore jobs and manufacturing from the US, but our customers around the world are pulling way back on capital expenditures, citing US policy uncertainties as a primary reason.
- hshdhdhj4444 9mo agoYup, unfortunately my own job is at risk as our company has, if not explicitly at least in action, essentially ended technical hiring in the U.S. They’re basically downsizing the technical sides through attrition while hiring heavily abroad.
- gehwartzen 9mo agoExactly what’s happening at my company
- FuriouslyAdrift 9mo agoI work for a regional manufacturing company in the US and we have been booming since COVID (nearly doubling every year) and have not seen a slow down. Manufacturing firms seem to be doing really well, here (midwest US).
- javiramos 9mo agoWhat industry?
- FuriouslyAdrift 9mo agoPackaging. Boxes, shippers, pallets, parts transports for use within automotive and other factories, etc. Very little direct to consumer or display stuff. Analysts use packaging companies as a canary for manufacturing in general.
- javiramos 9mo ago
- UncleOxidant 9mo agoI'm not a multinational, but that's what I've been doing since February.
- tick_tock_tick 9mo agoIt sadly doesn't work that well with tariffs in play again anything done outside the USA has to pay and frankly other nation just don't spend like American's.
- calvinmorrison 9mo agomore likely, higher interest rates and and oversupply of hiring from previous quantitative easing have left number of roles open limited, not to mention with AI - many companies feel there is a deflation in the market, that is to say, if we wait till next year our programmer may accomplish twice as much, why hire a second person now?
- saubeidl 9mo agoThere's another factor: Due to the unpredictable and unreliable nature of the current US administration, the rest of the west is "America-proofing" itself. Expect cash flows to dry up as Europe, Latam, Canada and Korea/Japan diversify away to more reliable suppliers. It's already happening.
- bluedino 9mo agoDoesn't every president do that, just to do different industries?
- theultdev 9mo agoYes they do. Not sure why you're being downvoted.
- aaomidi 9mo agoWe don’t really do tariffs like this before Trump. At least not for a long time.
- acdha 9mo agoAnd never this sweeping: like when Japanese car manufacturers were threatening Detroit, the president negotiated with Congress and the response was targeted, not a random shotgun on other countries and industries.
- irl_zebra 9mo agoTrue. I have not ordered a single product from the Heard Island and McDonald Islands since the tariffs were levied on them. I am champing at the bit for these to be reduced.
- acdha 9mo agoHaha, but every coffee, tea, snd chocolate provider I buy from has announced their prices going up and it’s not like there’s an American industry those taxes are supporting. Hawaii doesn’t have enough land to grow even a fraction of our domestic coffee consumption.
- FuriouslyAdrift 9mo agoReagon and Congress directly negotiated with the Japanese auto manufacturers. They were threatening major tarrifs. This lead to the 1981 automobile voluntary export restraint. https://www.nber.org/system/files/chapters/c8719/c8719.pdf https://www.nber.org/system/files/chapters/c8719/c8719.pdf
- adriand 9mo agoOne of my clients is a midsized logistics brokerage based in LA. Right now is RFP season, where they bid on freight contracts with various existing and potential customers. These contracts are typically one year long. A bid you submit now might be for a contract that goes Sept-Sept. This is difficult even under normal circumstances because you have to predict what carrier (trucker) rates will be in the future. You also have to predict fuel costs, because even though these are usually variable, when fuel costs go up so does your margin (so if you expect higher fuel prices you can lower your bid price). And you have to game out what your competitors are going to bid too. You can’t be too conservative (expensive) or you won’t get the bid. But if you lock in a contract with a certain expectation of rates and it swings the other way, you’re on the hook for millions in losses. Now imagine doing that normally difficult task in this environment. Who knows what will happen. Wars, a revocation of trucker drivers’ licenses (already happening in Cali), deportations, tariffs, the collapse of USMCA…the uncertainty is near endless. Big tech companies are doing great, everyone else is getting absolutely destroyed.
- oceansky 9mo agoWhy is the revocation taking place? Is it related to the federal government?
- jldugger 9mo agoRelated, yes. US DoT wants non-dom CDLs revoked[1]: > The decision comes amid pressure from the U.S. Department of Transportation, which announced in November 2025 that it would compel California to revoke thousands of what it calls “illegally issued” non-domiciled Commercial Driver’s Licenses. [1]: https://www.newsnationnow.com/politics/california-cancellation-migrant-trucker-licenses/ https://www.newsnationnow.com/politics/california-cancellati...
- klooney 9mo agoThere's been a big up about undocumented Sikh commercial drivers with CDL licenses, primarily because there have been some spectacular fatal crashes on video.
- 9mo ago
- FireBeyond 9mo agoYup. And the whole "Oh, we're not releasing the numbers because they're not right/misleading but trust us, the economy is the best its ever been!" is getting older and (even) less convincing.
- fundad 9mo agoThe people who I work with who support the current administration don't really value a good economy. They actually are smug about a worsening standard of living. What makes them happy is "tough talk" on immigration, to them the brutality against suspected undocumented immigrants is a good deterrent. It's not surprising but it's important to understand how important the brutality is and how unimportant economic growth is. It helps that they Silicon Valley tech workers who are already rich.
- spencerflem 9mo agoIt took me so long to realize this but it’s completely true. What they want most is for other people to suffer
- lenerdenator 9mo agoUnderstand something, though: many of those people making those decisions thought that the current administration would be a way to fix regulation. We're learning why government shouldn't be run like a business. Corporate governance, at least in the view of these people, arguably benefits from tyranny in some ways. You have a management structure where people have the ability to cut off your income and health insurance for an indeterminate amount of time for almost any reason. The reasons they can't fire you for are very specific and it's often on you, the now-jobless person, to prove their maleficence. Sounds pretty tyrannical to me. They thought if they had someone who was used to working within a system like that - and Trump absolutely was, having his name on the building he worked in his entire adult life - it'd allow them to get rid of roadblocks to productivity and increase the value created by their businesses. Well, as it turns out, an economy is different than a business, and needs to be run according to rules that were deliberated upon by the society at large. We had people warning about this ten years ago. They were ignored. We had him impeached five years ago. Didn't convict. We had him convicted of 34 felony counts less than two years ago. Didn't sentence. This is hubris manifest.
- rchaud 9mo agoSeems to me like it's American businesses that are increasingly operating like governments. Acquiring media outlets to manufacture consent, bending the courts to deregulate their operations, trading political favors and engaging in centralized economic planning for giant bets on AI, funded with debt.
- lenerdenator 9mo ago> engaging in centralized economic planning for giant bets on AI If they're centralizing economic planning on that, then there's probably at least some economic planning that they would be doing to keep a relatively stable regulatory regime in place. Which, y'know, isn't the case. Ultimately the world has reached a point where social systems in both business and government are run the same way. Probably because they're run by the same kind of person. Sometimes even the same people.
- giantg2 9mo agoThe theory makes sense, but it doesn't match with the graphics in the article. We can see that job openings have been declining since before the 2024 election and that hiring actually increased briefly around the time the tarrifs were implemented. This seems to suggest there are other factors at play, including macro trends.
- nis0s 9mo agoInvestment monies have been tightened across the board, mainly due to high interest rates and the fact that investments in anything other than Tech/AI don’t match expectations of growth.
- dilyevsky 9mo agowe had a much larger disruption to logistics just a few years ago if you recall =) and hiring really took off then. so i don't think this argument really holds any water
- mbgerring 9mo agoMoney was free then, and hiring took off in software, which people were relying on a lot more during the pandemic. All of my friends who are performers or work in events were wrecked financially. The industry still hasn’t really recovered.
- dilyevsky 9mo agoIt wasn’t just software, far from it. Hospitality, construction, local/state government, healthcare jobs all soared in 2021
- nis0s 9mo agoUS companies have long been reliant on free flowing investment monies subsidized by the USG. Tightening those purse strings has reduced the level of jobs openings, including tightening of SBIRs and other non-research grant programs that small to medium sized companies use. Small business loans are also tight or non-existent. So, of course jobs will be limited. The macro-level economic policies really only affect large corporations, unless a business is impacted by the tariffs. In general, hiring is fucked by immigration visas in large companies, which are still going strong and sneaking around the anti-immigration barriers. In some way, hiring non-U.S. workers for work funded by the USG is unacceptable, and economic theft. If USG opens up funding more, then things will normalize, including for immigrant or non-U.S. contract workers in other places. As always, it’s the economy that’s the problem, but which part of it is always hard to pin down when other parts of it make up for it.
- bakies 9mo agoThis is just Trump, not the USG as a whole. Congress approved a budget and Trump refuses to give the money out. People have to fight in court to get the money they're owed.
- nis0s 9mo agoData shows jobs have been in decline before Trump, likely related to reduced investments from high inflation and high interest rates. I guess I should add that part of opening up more funding includes managing other aspects so we don’t end up in the same economic environment post-2020.
- sakopov 9mo agoHiring slowed to a crawl back in 2023. A nice smack in the face after the "Great Resignation" period.