Replies

The sad truth is that full-time employees are a huge expense for companies, and they are always looking for ways to eliminate them. Work still has to be done, but some third party can do it for less with either contractors or an army of part-timers/per diem workers. We were warned that ObamaCare would aggravate this situation, and it definitely did.
For what it’s worth, any time someone points to a roaring stock market as a sign of a good economy, remember that the best way for a company to shoot up its stock price is to shed American workers. The shareholders may benefit and sing the praises of the economy, but the average Joe is left with nothing.

Absolute nonsense. You've clearly never owned a company or had employees before. You also spew the empty tripe of the Left.

"Always looking for ways to eliminate them"? Utterly moronic.
Employees are the engines that create revenues in the system an owner built. The path to success and growth is MORE employees. Yes, as one seeks to be more efficient, sometimes some employees can and should be released (not all employees are stellar, by the way... ever heard of the 80-20 Rule?). Further, while FTE's do bring more associated costs (especially insurance), that does not mean that contractors, PTEs, and per diem employees are a better choice. Up front training costs are always a very significant issue. The new guy can't do the job as well, as fast, or as efficiently as the gal who has been here for ten years. Spiking costs by insuring that training is a CONSTANT need, and rookie mistakes are now ubiquitous, is suicidal.

"the best way for a company to shoot up its stock price is to shed American workers"... Where do idiots come up with this garbage? You know nothing about stock markets either, clearly.
There are a dozen better ways to make a stock price jump. In point of fact, massive layoffs are a clear signal of weakness to the market, and is more likely to make a stock price fall, through investors selling. Cutting a small amount of staff also won't make a stock price "shoot up". Never has and never will. Jumps come from announcements of innovations, large offerings to the public (IPOs, stock splits, etc), or huge contracts being signed... or (often manipulated) large buying jags... but no stock jump has ever come from large or small layoffs.

"The shareholders may benefit and sing the praises of the economy, but the average Joe is left with nothing."
This is the whining of the Marxist, or of someone who was laid off once. Most displaced long term FTEs are left with decent severance packages, and are often given the time to search for their next position before being let go. The first time I was part of a downsizing, when I was a kid, I found a scholarship for laid off employees. My severance package of 12 weeks of pay in a lump sum, plus a semester of school paid for, carried me for almost an entire year. It is not the responsibility of the owner of the position to do anything for the employee who enjoyed the benefits of that position for however many years they chose to stay. If you failed to build savings and other backstops during your time there, that's your fault, not the owner's. You brought nothing at the day of your hiring that you didn't take with you on the day you were let go. Your time in between was well-compensated, as proven by the fact that you stayed.