I was arguing against the below statements specifically, which I don't think are accurate based on my experience. I've been at companies that let slide non-productivity because it's easier than firing, until times are tight. Then, since they have to layoff someone, they layoff the unproductive since they don't hurt their departments that way.
"You may argue that this doesn't take into account productivity, but I believe that's irrelevant. If you're at a company that values productivity, then everyone will be productive; the idea that there's a 10x difference between top and bottom is a myth"
I think he's arguing that if you think you're productive, chances are everybody is productive on the team, at least in the boss's eyes.
If you're not productive, you certainly do have to worry about getting laid off (or fired). But when I've known folks who were fired for non-productivity, they didn't really care all that much. In fact, they were fired because they didn't care. These folks often get let go before an official round of layoffs, although in some companies they accumulate until the first round of layoffs.
The fact that you're worrying about your place on the layoff list at all is an indication that you won't be laid off for productivity reasons, only for salary/strategic reasons.
"You may argue that this doesn't take into account productivity, but I believe that's irrelevant. If you're at a company that values productivity, then everyone will be productive; the idea that there's a 10x difference between top and bottom is a myth"