[hliyan]

Looking at the phenomenon more clinically: when management attempts to extract the maximum amount of work for the minimum amount of pay, it's only natural that the employee attempts to maximize pay for the least amount of work. Both are being economically rational, but economic rationality at times can be indistinguishable from psychopathy.

[Lev1a]

The problem with this kind of mass-layoffs to maximize earnings is that it's a very short-term gain prioritized over long-term growth, a symptom of the cancer that is the mentality "shareholders expect infinite growth forever".

[gruez]

>it's a very short-term gain prioritized over long-term growth, a symptom of the cancer that is the mentality "shareholders expect infinite growth forever".

But "shareholders expect infinite growth forever" directly contradicts "short-term gain prioritized over long-term growth"? Even if they prioritized long term growth that would still be "shareholders expect infinite growth forever".

[ImPostingOnHN]

> But "shareholders expect infinite growth forever" directly contradicts "short-term gain prioritized over long-term growth"?

But it doesn't?

Shareholders expect companies to make whatever decisions are necessary to maximize short term profits, expect those profits to be infinite, and expect this to happen every quarter, every year, in perpetuity.

[gruez]

The part that's contradictory and that you omitted was "short-term gain prioritized over long-term growth". While it's theoretically possible for the two to coexist, the way it's presented is as one-or-the-other proposition, which is where the contradiction comes from. If it wasn't one-or-the-other, people wouldn't getting mad over it.

[smolder]

It makes more sense as "shareholders, over the long term, always want high short term growth". It's possible to be focused on short term growth in perpetuity. It's not rational for investors to make demands that harm their own long term goals, but you could argue they do sometimes, at least in aggregate.