[bsbsinai]

Start building an emergency fund when you see an emergency is already too late. Cutting an expense or two in hardship is fine but the problem is after one windfall taking on recurring spend of extra services assumes a windfall to recur too. Isn't this similar to living pay check to paycheck? If this is someone else's personal finance I'd say it's none of my business, but if it's likened to a public company, I'd say it's not well managed.

[sokoloff]

If you believe a public company is mismanaged, you should not invest in it. If you believe it’s seriously mismanaged and others don’t yet realize that, you could even consider shorting it.

Others who believe the company is well-managed by looking at the forecasts and deciding to return to staffing levels still well above their 2021 (but lower than last month) will continue to hold (or even buy) the shares.

This difference of opinion is what makes a market.

[avslinev]

The point looks to be diluted as the thread progressed. It went from questioning potential shortcomings in the status quo to pointing that one could profit off the status quo, and hence justifying it.

The point imo was how many companies can be potentially overly aggressive during a bull market/bubble e.g. over hire, and seemingly have no accountability for a handful decision makers affecting thousands of people. Mass layoffs can have serious consequences on the people and the economy.

Yes, the employees should expect it and be prepared, and yes, share holders can profit off it, however to give an example there are precedents like the mortgage crisis where there were regulations imposed preventing companies taking unnecessary risks and causing major economic events. So, it isn't that outlandish to question if a (many) companies took too many unnecessary risks.