I'm already planning to semi-retire but keep working at something lower stress even if it pays considerably less. I enjoy being productive and don't mind physical labor or even what seem like dull or unpleasant tasks as long as I feel like I am accomplishing something and being fairly compensated for what I am being tasked to do.

I totally understand how it isn't for some people but I'm one of those M-Briggs ISTP types. I always need to be doing something and if that's hands on tasks then that's just fine by me. The only thing I prefer is to deal with stuff more than people.

LMCane said:

---

MouthBQ98 said:

---

Perhaps, if you are a bit too egotistical to do the work that is available vs the work you wish was available. If your best skills are in surplus, your value really is less at that moment in the labor market, so then are you really underemployed or rather over credentialed in that particular circumstance?

I'm just saying it never hurt anyone to keep working while they are looking for the next better opportunity, if they can manage it.

---

I have been thinking about this when planning for early retirement in my 50s.

is it better to just take a part time job making a decent salary but it's a pretty crappy job..

or keep working as a corporate attorney with the high salary but much more stress and having to work full time.

tied in with just moving to where I want to live and find some job there, or look for a job in my career field which could be in different states.

---

I don't think you will be happy doing something part time, and being most likely treated like crap. Especially after a good career as a corp attorney.

I think it is best to just quit and do other things assuming you have the net worth for it. Spend time with kids and maybe even grand kids. Play golf, develop hobbies etc etc.

Many of my friends have the same discussions and I tell them that taking up a lower stressfree job still means you are kicked around the same amount but now for a lower pay.

I am currently looking for a new job. I am being selective - yes even in this economy. I have made the mistake of taking up interim jobs which were miserable and did not advance my career which has stalled. I decided I had to bite the bullet, get the new skills I needed to make an advancement, and take some risks. Luckily I do well in investing so I can manage, and my wife is working so insurance is covered. I will work for the next 10 years max and then be done.

MouthBQ98 said:

---

I'm already planning to semi-retire but keep working at something lower stress even if it pays considerably less. I enjoy being productive and don't mind physical labor or even what seem like dull or unpleasant tasks as long as I feel like I am accomplishing something and being fairly compensated for what I am being tasked to do.

I totally understand how it isn't for some people but I'm one of those M-Briggs ISTP types. I always need to be doing something and if that's hands on tasks then that's just fine by me. The only thing I prefer is to deal with stuff more than people.

---

Move to SA, and come work with your favorite MexiHonky.

Saw this show up in my Linkedin a few minutes ago. Corporate skulduggery.
Focus on the part where the CEO ravishes the company after pillaging it.

Cousin Eddie holding out for a management position refusing to do any other work doesn't really get my sympathy.

You really think the DLS after pumping up lib administration numbers for 4 years is trying to make Trump look good by lying about the numbers?

Gig em G said:

---

The job market is completely broken. I know more colleagues that are laid off and looking for work than I have since 2008. It's the worst I've personally seen

---

Not seeing that. We have been trying to hire for months and every time we interview somebody, they have already accepted another job before we can even get them an offer letter. Some fields are slow, but others are hot.

So if the President does four rounds of layoffs over the next few years, are you going to think he is doing a great job or is totally incompetent?

Companies get leaner all the time and with some of the new technology like AI, this is going to keep happening and it is a good thing.

Gig em G said:

---

The job market is completely broken. I know more colleagues that are laid off and looking for work than I have since 2008. It's the worst I've personally seen

---

Same here. I am still employed but have been looking for something else for quite some time. Its an extremely hard market right now. What is really frustrating is the amount of info(good and bad) on the best approach to getting past an ATS and an interview. Its a lot to sift through and know what is real and what isnt.

infinity ag said:

---

Saw this show up in my Linkedin a few minutes ago. Corporate skulduggery.
Focus on the part where the CEO ravishes the company after pillaging it.

---

All depends on what position the company was in before he started and what the board hired him to do. If the board recognized that the company was bloated with excess cost and underperforming expectations, with fundamentally good market share, then cutting excess employees in a way that didn't trigger long notification requirements (like could be required with 1 large layoff) was likely seen as a win. Layoffs are perceived as a sign of an unhealthy company by some, but often they are a sign of a company getting healthy, not one that is in trouble. Making the company's performance better vs peers without losing market share is worthy of a bonus for a management team. The one described seems a bit excessive, but if it was what was negotiated with the board, hard to argue against it.

txags92 said:

---

Gig em G said:

---

The job market is completely broken. I know more colleagues that are laid off and looking for work than I have since 2008. It's the worst I've personally seen

---

Not seeing that. We have been trying to hire for months and every time we interview somebody, they have already accepted another job before we can even get them an offer letter. Some fields are slow, but others are hot.

---

What kind of jobs?

Jeeper79 said:

---

txags92 said:

---

Gig em G said:

---

The job market is completely broken. I know more colleagues that are laid off and looking for work than I have since 2008. It's the worst I've personally seen

---

Not seeing that. We have been trying to hire for months and every time we interview somebody, they have already accepted another job before we can even get them an offer letter. Some fields are slow, but others are hot.

---

What kind of jobs?

---

Junior to low mid-level environmental field geologist with a few years of experience and ability to write reports.

Hoyt Ag said:

---

LMCane said:

---

MouthBQ98 said:

---

Perhaps, if you are a bit too egotistical to do the work that is available vs the work you wish was available. If your best skills are in surplus, your value really is less at that moment in the labor market, so then are you really underemployed or rather over credentialed in that particular circumstance?

I'm just saying it never hurt anyone to keep working while they are looking for the next better opportunity, if they can manage it.

---

I have been thinking about this when planning for early retirement in my 50s.

is it better to just take a part time job making a decent salary but it's a pretty crappy job..

or keep working as a corporate attorney with the high salary but much more stress and having to work full time.

tied in with just moving to where I want to live and find some job there, or look for a job in my career field which could be in different states.

---

Im in the same boat, but a little younger. My plan is to slow travel 6 months or so a year and then have a part time gig in the States to make a little money and keep busy. I have time to iron out the details, but I see no benefit in the bolded, IMO.

---

Thanks - I agree but it could be that a part time job working the vast majority of jobs would be just as annoying.

It may be that is why they call it "work" and not "vacation"

so I am conflicted because a lot of Americans like working a shift job and then clock out and never have to worry about it.

others say that kind of work sucks.

any other part-time semiretired folks on here who can chime in with their employment ideas

Kansas Kid said:

---

So if the President does four rounds of layoffs over the next few years, are you going to think he is doing a great job or is totally incompetent?

Companies get leaner all the time and with some of the new technology like AI, this is going to keep happening and it is a good thing.

---

The issue is the CEO ripping the company off after decimating the company. Somehow he is able to do it because of collusion with the Board. Don't be so naive that you don't see this, please.

txags92 said:

---

Gig em G said:

---

The job market is completely broken. I know more colleagues that are laid off and looking for work than I have since 2008. It's the worst I've personally seen

---

Not seeing that. We have been trying to hire for months and every time we interview somebody, they have already accepted another job before we can even get them an offer letter. Some fields are slow, but others are hot.

---

What is the salary range you offer? Can you also post the Job title? What is the field the job is in?

I get the feeling the salary range is very low and the title is very junior. If people have accepted another offer, then offer 10% more. Ultimately everything comes down to money. US Companies have found a way to cheat Americans by claiming what you claim and using that to import people from abroad (slaves) and to justify paying the C suite large bonuses.

infinity ag said:

---

Kansas Kid said:

---

So if the President does four rounds of layoffs over the next few years, are you going to think he is doing a great job or is totally incompetent?

Companies get leaner all the time and with some of the new technology like AI, this is going to keep happening and it is a good thing.

---

The issue is the CEO ripping the company off after decimating the company. Somehow he is able to do it because of collusion with the Board. Don't be so naive that you don't see this, please.

---

Did he decimate the company? Or did he right size the workforce to match the effort needed to be profitable? And did he rip off the company? Or did he receive the bonus spelled out in the contract he signed with the board that required him to hit specific metrics of performance? How did the company's output and profit trend after the layoffs? Just because layoffs occurred doesn't mean he was hurting the company.

I am not arguing for the pattern of CEOs coming in and jettisoning tons of good employees for short term stock performance gains then bailing out and leaving the company in tatters. But that isn't always what is happening when multiple rounds of layoffs occur in a relatively short period of time.

I live in NW Colorado and my neighbor a few doors down drives the snow plows for the state in the winter. 30/hr and stays busy. He is 57 and semi retired. the rest of the year he either slow travels, does locum divemaster work in SEA or just fishes the Yampa and White River. Not sure if that helps, but seasonal work could be an option. If you are an attorney, I would start networking to get a consulting gig going, then you can make a name for yourself and work when you want.

infinity ag said:

---

txags92 said:

---

Gig em G said:

---

The job market is completely broken. I know more colleagues that are laid off and looking for work than I have since 2008. It's the worst I've personally seen

---

Not seeing that. We have been trying to hire for months and every time we interview somebody, they have already accepted another job before we can even get them an offer letter. Some fields are slow, but others are hot.

---

What is the salary range you offer? Can you also post the Job title? What is the field the job is in?

I get the feeling the salary range is very low and the title is very junior. If people have accepted another offer, then offer 10% more. Ultimately everything comes down to money. US Companies have found a way to cheat Americans by claiming what you claim and using that to import people from abroad (slaves) and to justify paying the C suite large bonuses.

---

I think what we are offering is a fair salary, but there are definitely some offering more due to how quickly the candidates are getting snapped up. But our work is more stable working longer government contracts than the hire and fire habits of some of our competitors. The bigger problem we are having is not actually getting to the point of getting to offer them before they already accept another job. We have changed tactics and started trying to recruit people who are still working elsewhere instead of people actively on the market seeking a new job. I would post it, but I think we just finally found the guy we want and will likely be making an offer in the next few days.

Might also be a function of too long of a hiring process? 1 maybe 2 interviews then offer. So many companies take forever (not saying yours is) in the hiring process.

Hoyt Ag said:

---

Might also be a function of too long of a hiring process? 1 maybe 2 interviews then offer. So many companies take forever (not saying yours is) in the hiring process.

---

That for sure played at least a part, mainly on the front end with our recruiters taking too long to ID people that were looking and get resumes forwarded to the managers. We are working with a more active recruiter now that is reaching out to people working elsewhere instead of just sitting back and waiting for resumes to show up. We were typically doing 1 phone interview and 1 in person/teams interview before offering. There is just more demand than available people right now so they were moving really fast.

txags92 said:

---

infinity ag said:

---

txags92 said:

---

Gig em G said:

---

The job market is completely broken. I know more colleagues that are laid off and looking for work than I have since 2008. It's the worst I've personally seen

---

Not seeing that. We have been trying to hire for months and every time we interview somebody, they have already accepted another job before we can even get them an offer letter. Some fields are slow, but others are hot.

---

What is the salary range you offer? Can you also post the Job title? What is the field the job is in?

I get the feeling the salary range is very low and the title is very junior. If people have accepted another offer, then offer 10% more. Ultimately everything comes down to money. US Companies have found a way to cheat Americans by claiming what you claim and using that to import people from abroad (slaves) and to justify paying the C suite large bonuses.

---

I think what we are offering is a fair salary, but there are definitely some offering more due to how quickly the candidates are getting snapped up. But our work is more stable working longer government contracts than the hire and fire habits of some of our competitors. The bigger problem we are having is not actually getting to the point of getting to offer them before they already accept another job. We have changed tactics and started trying to recruit people who are still working elsewhere instead of people actively on the market seeking a new job. I would post it, but I think we just finally found the guy we want and will likely be making an offer in the next few days.

---

Ultimately, excuses don't matter and if you want a candidate, you got to compete and shell out. Many companies have a workaround and avoid competition by hiring overseas, importing foreigners. This will result in the US becoming a 3rd world country.

Saying "we can't find a candidate" is just not believable.

Hoyt Ag said:

---

I live in NW Colorado and my neighbor a few doors down drives the snow plows for the state in the winter. 30/hr and stays busy. He is 57 and semi retired. the rest of the year he either slow travels, does locum divemaster work in SEA or just fishes the Yampa and White River. Not sure if that helps, but seasonal work could be an option. If you are an attorney, I would start networking to get a consulting gig going, then you can make a name for yourself and work when you want.

---

A Corp attorney isn't going to drive a snow plow. I myself wouldn't do it. Nothing wrong in the job, people rarely move backwards in life unless they are desperate. I have a friend with 25 years tech experience as a Engg Manager. US Citizen. Seattle. Started today in a low end job data engineering doing something that needs 2 years experience. I called him over the weekend and he was hating what things have come down to.

infinity ag said:

---

txags92 said:

---

infinity ag said:

---

txags92 said:

---

Gig em G said:

---

The job market is completely broken. I know more colleagues that are laid off and looking for work than I have since 2008. It's the worst I've personally seen

---

Not seeing that. We have been trying to hire for months and every time we interview somebody, they have already accepted another job before we can even get them an offer letter. Some fields are slow, but others are hot.

---

What is the salary range you offer? Can you also post the Job title? What is the field the job is in?

I get the feeling the salary range is very low and the title is very junior. If people have accepted another offer, then offer 10% more. Ultimately everything comes down to money. US Companies have found a way to cheat Americans by claiming what you claim and using that to import people from abroad (slaves) and to justify paying the C suite large bonuses.

---

I think what we are offering is a fair salary, but there are definitely some offering more due to how quickly the candidates are getting snapped up. But our work is more stable working longer government contracts than the hire and fire habits of some of our competitors. The bigger problem we are having is not actually getting to the point of getting to offer them before they already accept another job. We have changed tactics and started trying to recruit people who are still working elsewhere instead of people actively on the market seeking a new job. I would post it, but I think we just finally found the guy we want and will likely be making an offer in the next few days.

---

Ultimately, excuses don't matter and if you want a candidate, you got to compete and shell out. Many companies have a workaround and avoid competition by hiring overseas, importing foreigners. This will result in the US becoming a 3rd world country.

Saying "we can't find a candidate" is just not believable.

---

We have found plenty of candidates we wanted to hire, they just got hire elsewhere first. We have adapted what we are doing to match the conditions. Wasn't trying to make it sound like there were no candidates out there. Just stating that my experience of the ones on the market getting snapped up fast differed from the experience you described of your colleagues who were having difficulty finding opportunities.

txags92 said:

---

infinity ag said:

---

Kansas Kid said:

---

So if the President does four rounds of layoffs over the next few years, are you going to think he is doing a great job or is totally incompetent?

Companies get leaner all the time and with some of the new technology like AI, this is going to keep happening and it is a good thing.

---

The issue is the CEO ripping the company off after decimating the company. Somehow he is able to do it because of collusion with the Board. Don't be so naive that you don't see this, please.

---

Did he decimate the company? Or did he right size the workforce to match the effort needed to be profitable? And did he rip off the company? Or did he receive the bonus spelled out in the contract he signed with the board that required him to hit specific metrics of performance? How did the company's output and profit trend after the layoffs? Just because layoffs occurred doesn't mean he was hurting the company.

I am not arguing for the pattern of CEOs coming in and jettisoning tons of good employees for short term stock performance gains then bailing out and leaving the company in tatters. But that isn't always what is happening when multiple rounds of layoffs occur in a relatively short period of time.

---

4 layoffs in 3 years is not a good look. It shows that he is just a terrible leader and should have been booted out long ago. But why would the board do it? They are in cahoots with the guy. They are all making money.

"Right Sizing" is all nonsense. The CEO is responsible for approving the hiring in the first place. First he screws up by overhiring, then he lays people off in mass numbers and then collects a big bonus for his hard work.

What is worse is people tying themselves into knots to justify this poor behavior that has no legal recourse.

txags92 said:

---

infinity ag said:

---

txags92 said:

---

infinity ag said:

---

txags92 said:

---

Gig em G said:

---

The job market is completely broken. I know more colleagues that are laid off and looking for work than I have since 2008. It's the worst I've personally seen

---

Not seeing that. We have been trying to hire for months and every time we interview somebody, they have already accepted another job before we can even get them an offer letter. Some fields are slow, but others are hot.

---

What is the salary range you offer? Can you also post the Job title? What is the field the job is in?

I get the feeling the salary range is very low and the title is very junior. If people have accepted another offer, then offer 10% more. Ultimately everything comes down to money. US Companies have found a way to cheat Americans by claiming what you claim and using that to import people from abroad (slaves) and to justify paying the C suite large bonuses.

---

I think what we are offering is a fair salary, but there are definitely some offering more due to how quickly the candidates are getting snapped up. But our work is more stable working longer government contracts than the hire and fire habits of some of our competitors. The bigger problem we are having is not actually getting to the point of getting to offer them before they already accept another job. We have changed tactics and started trying to recruit people who are still working elsewhere instead of people actively on the market seeking a new job. I would post it, but I think we just finally found the guy we want and will likely be making an offer in the next few days.

---

Ultimately, excuses don't matter and if you want a candidate, you got to compete and shell out. Many companies have a workaround and avoid competition by hiring overseas, importing foreigners. This will result in the US becoming a 3rd world country.

Saying "we can't find a candidate" is just not believable.

---

We have found plenty of candidates we wanted to hire, they just got hire elsewhere first. We have adapted what we are doing to match the conditions. Wasn't trying to make it sound like there were no candidates out there. Just stating that my experience of the ones on the market getting snapped up fast differed from the experience you described of your colleagues who were having difficulty finding opportunities.

---

It's the same thing. Your company was not attractive enough compared to others. Jack up your salaries by 20% and see people breaking down the doors to get in.
Not a very difficult situation you are in. Unless you don't want to pay fair (which looks like it is the case)

infinity ag said:

---

txags92 said:

---

infinity ag said:

---

Kansas Kid said:

---

So if the President does four rounds of layoffs over the next few years, are you going to think he is doing a great job or is totally incompetent?

Companies get leaner all the time and with some of the new technology like AI, this is going to keep happening and it is a good thing.

---

The issue is the CEO ripping the company off after decimating the company. Somehow he is able to do it because of collusion with the Board. Don't be so naive that you don't see this, please.

---

Did he decimate the company? Or did he right size the workforce to match the effort needed to be profitable? And did he rip off the company? Or did he receive the bonus spelled out in the contract he signed with the board that required him to hit specific metrics of performance? How did the company's output and profit trend after the layoffs? Just because layoffs occurred doesn't mean he was hurting the company.

I am not arguing for the pattern of CEOs coming in and jettisoning tons of good employees for short term stock performance gains then bailing out and leaving the company in tatters. But that isn't always what is happening when multiple rounds of layoffs occur in a relatively short period of time.

---

4 layoffs in 3 years is not a good look. It shows that he is just a terrible leader and should have been booted out long ago. But why would the board do it? They are in cahoots with the guy. They are all making money.

"Right Sizing" is all nonsense. The CEO is responsible for approving the hiring in the first place. First he screws up by overhiring, then he lays people off in mass numbers and then collects a big bonus for his hard work.

What is worse is people tying themselves into knots to justify this poor behavior that has no legal recourse.

---

There is a significant cost to the company if you do one big layoff that requires 60 days notice rather than multiple smaller ones over time. Doing multiple layoffs isn't always a sign of bad leadership. I don't know the company or the situation, just pointing out it isn't always what it seems.

infinity ag said:

---

txags92 said:

---

infinity ag said:

---

txags92 said:

---

infinity ag said:

---

txags92 said:

---

Gig em G said:

---

The job market is completely broken. I know more colleagues that are laid off and looking for work than I have since 2008. It's the worst I've personally seen

---

Not seeing that. We have been trying to hire for months and every time we interview somebody, they have already accepted another job before we can even get them an offer letter. Some fields are slow, but others are hot.

---

What is the salary range you offer? Can you also post the Job title? What is the field the job is in?

I get the feeling the salary range is very low and the title is very junior. If people have accepted another offer, then offer 10% more. Ultimately everything comes down to money. US Companies have found a way to cheat Americans by claiming what you claim and using that to import people from abroad (slaves) and to justify paying the C suite large bonuses.

---

I think what we are offering is a fair salary, but there are definitely some offering more due to how quickly the candidates are getting snapped up. But our work is more stable working longer government contracts than the hire and fire habits of some of our competitors. The bigger problem we are having is not actually getting to the point of getting to offer them before they already accept another job. We have changed tactics and started trying to recruit people who are still working elsewhere instead of people actively on the market seeking a new job. I would post it, but I think we just finally found the guy we want and will likely be making an offer in the next few days.

---

Ultimately, excuses don't matter and if you want a candidate, you got to compete and shell out. Many companies have a workaround and avoid competition by hiring overseas, importing foreigners. This will result in the US becoming a 3rd world country.

Saying "we can't find a candidate" is just not believable.

---

We have found plenty of candidates we wanted to hire, they just got hire elsewhere first. We have adapted what we are doing to match the conditions. Wasn't trying to make it sound like there were no candidates out there. Just stating that my experience of the ones on the market getting snapped up fast differed from the experience you described of your colleagues who were having difficulty finding opportunities.

---

It's the same thing. Your company was not attractive enough compared to others. Jack up your salaries by 20% and see people breaking down the doors to get in.
Not a very difficult situation you are in. Unless you don't want to pay fair (which looks like it is the case)

---

Respectfully, you are not listening to what I am saying. We were losing the candidates before they even knew what we were offering. It wasn't a matter of them receiving our offer and deciding to go elsewhere because our offer was too low, it was mostly us calling to make an offer and them telling us they had already accepted another position. Obviously your market conditions are different than ours trying to find positions for people with 20+ years experience in a market that is shrinking or being staffed from overseas, while the market in our business for junior level (3-5 yrs exp) staff is robust.

infinity ag said:

---

LMCane said:

---

MouthBQ98 said:

---

Perhaps, if you are a bit too egotistical to do the work that is available vs the work you wish was available. If your best skills are in surplus, your value really is less at that moment in the labor market, so then are you really underemployed or rather over credentialed in that particular circumstance?

I'm just saying it never hurt anyone to keep working while they are looking for the next better opportunity, if they can manage it.

---

I have been thinking about this when planning for early retirement in my 50s.

is it better to just take a part time job making a decent salary but it's a pretty crappy job..

or keep working as a corporate attorney with the high salary but much more stress and having to work full time.

tied in with just moving to where I want to live and find some job there, or look for a job in my career field which could be in different states.

---

I don't think you will be happy doing something part time, and being most likely treated like crap. Especially after a good career as a corp attorney.

I think it is best to just quit and do other things assuming you have the net worth for it. Spend time with kids and maybe even grand kids. Play gold, develop hobbies etc etc.

Many of my friends have the same discussions and I tell them that taking up a lower stressfree job still means you are kicked around the same amount but now for a lower pay.

I am currently looking for a new job. I am being selective - yes even in this economy. I have made the mistake of taking up interim jobs which were miserable and did not advance my career which has stalled. I decided I had to bite the bullet, get the new skills I needed to make an advancement, and take some risks. Luckily I do well in investing so I can manage, and my wife is working so insurance is covered. I will work for the next 10 years max and then be done.

---

appreciate the advice I think you are most likely correct. Although I am able to subsume ego to do less glamorous work (at least I could do it for a few months when I worked for a University)

but I think it is a tough decision for EVERY American to balance pay salary versus type of occupation versus amount of stress.

would love to work at a horse ranch but worry that would destroy physical health being in the mid to latter 50s.

infinity ag said:

---

Kansas Kid said:

---

So if the President does four rounds of layoffs over the next few years, are you going to think he is doing a great job or is totally incompetent?

Companies get leaner all the time and with some of the new technology like AI, this is going to keep happening and it is a good thing.

---

The issue is the CEO ripping the company off after decimating the company. Somehow he is able to do it because of collusion with the Board. Don't be so naive that you don't see this, please.

---

There are many private companies that do this also where the CEO is the largest/only shareholder. Are they ripping themselves off?!?' Conditions change. Contracts are lost. Companies figure out how to do things with fewer resources. And so on. Other layoffs happen because the company staffed up to launch a new product or anticipated more sales that didn't work out.

This is how capitalism works. The fact the US makes it easier to reduce staffing than most countries is part of why we have a much stronger economy than most countries where firing someone is almost impossible because companies can't right size costs.

Are there bad CEOs? Yes. Are there others that are overpaid? Yes. That said the stable of CEOs in this country on average are the best in the world which is why we have the best economy in the world.

infinity ag said:

---

Kansas Kid said:

---

So if the President does four rounds of layoffs over the next few years, are you going to think he is doing a great job or is totally incompetent?

Companies get leaner all the time and with some of the new technology like AI, this is going to keep happening and it is a good thing.

---

The issue is the CEO ripping the company off after decimating the company. Somehow he is able to do it because of collusion with the Board. Don't be so naive that you don't see this, please.

---

Are you referring to what hedge fund companies do to the organizations they invade?

infinity ag said:

---

Kansas Kid said:

---

So if the President does four rounds of layoffs over the next few years, are you going to think he is doing a great job or is totally incompetent?

Companies get leaner all the time and with some of the new technology like AI, this is going to keep happening and it is a good thing.

---

The issue is the CEO ripping the company off after decimating the company. Somehow he is able to do it because of collusion with the Board. Don't be so naive that you don't see this, please.

---

Infinity, per your own posts, you are fairly wealthy and have done really well in the stock market benefiting from the hard work CEO's of major companies have put in. If thats the case, why the irrational hatred towards CEO's that have helped you obtain wealth?

Im not super pro CEO or anything, but I realize I have benefited greatly from working for companies/CEO's that have paid me well, good bonuses, 401k matches, appreciating stock price, etc. Sure, Ive been laid off, but I just move on to the next company where I can benefit from the company's resources. I have done well in the stock market also, so I dont care if a CEO is paid a crazy amount of money, as long as the stock price goes up which benefits me and other shareholders.

Street Fighter said:

---

infinity ag said:

---

Kansas Kid said:

---

So if the President does four rounds of layoffs over the next few years, are you going to think he is doing a great job or is totally incompetent?

Companies get leaner all the time and with some of the new technology like AI, this is going to keep happening and it is a good thing.

---

The issue is the CEO ripping the company off after decimating the company. Somehow he is able to do it because of collusion with the Board. Don't be so naive that you don't see this, please.

---

Are you referring to what hedge fund companies do to the organizations they invade?

---

I do have issues with what some hedge funds have done to companies but that is a totally different scenario than the one he is describing because the CEO is doing things at the direction of the shareholder.

This sounds freakin' awesome! Less cheap crap from China, less 18 wheeler traffic and less rude Eurpean tourists? Sign me up!

Petrino1 said:

---

infinity ag said:

---

Kansas Kid said:

---

So if the President does four rounds of layoffs over the next few years, are you going to think he is doing a great job or is totally incompetent?

Companies get leaner all the time and with some of the new technology like AI, this is going to keep happening and it is a good thing.

---

The issue is the CEO ripping the company off after decimating the company. Somehow he is able to do it because of collusion with the Board. Don't be so naive that you don't see this, please.

---

Infinity, per your own posts, you are fairly wealthy and have done really well in the stock market benefiting from the hard work CEO's of major companies have put in. If thats the case, why the irrational hatred towards CEO's that have helped you obtain wealth?

Im not super pro CEO or anything, but I realize I have benefited greatly from working for companies/CEO's that have paid me well, good bonuses, 401k matches, appreciating stock price, etc. Sure, Ive been laid off, but I just move on to the next company where I can benefit from the company's resources. I have done well in the stock market also, so I dont care if a CEO is paid a crazy amount of money, as long as the stock price goes up which benefits me and other shareholders.

---

Yes, as of today, I am pretty comfortable. I don't know what tomorrow brings though. My career has struggled but I have done very well investing.

But you are missing the point. This is not about me. It is about us. About America. About our kids and grandkids. If things go this way, I will retire comfortably but I am not sure about my children and yet to be born grandchildren. We are hollowing out this country in order to make only a small section of the population wealthy. We are calling it "hard work being rewarded" so that we stay within our notion of American values.

I realized some time ago that hard work does not pay in America like it did in the past. Please don't reply back with "you can become a plumber or do HVAC jobs", no this is what I busted my balls doing 2 US grad degrees for (one being A&M). I am not alone, many Americans face this today when they are forced to train people from India who are in no way superior to them. In fact much much inferior.

So I see the only way to get wealthy in America is to invest well or run a business well. I decided to do the former and I am a numbers person so I experimented a lot over many many years and have developed some investing skills after many missteps and losses. I made it such that if the slimy CEO makes money, so do I. That b@st@rd now works for me! But still, is it right? No. I am doing well because I had the education, what about my fellow Americans?

Irrational hatred? No. It is purely rational because they are the architects of our future demise as a nation. I am thinking long term, not today or tomorrow.

I also want to clarify that I actually don't care about if the CEO is making a crazy amount of money. But I do care if the CEO is making a crazy amount of money WHILE laying off 1000s of innocent hard working Americans while smirking and calling it "right sizing". No, not right. It is not okay to ruin a company, ruin lives and make off with a 20M bonus.

Anyway good post and thanks for asking, I hope I have clarified my stance.

Kansas Kid said:

---

infinity ag said:

---

Kansas Kid said:

---

So if the President does four rounds of layoffs over the next few years, are you going to think he is doing a great job or is totally incompetent?

Companies get leaner all the time and with some of the new technology like AI, this is going to keep happening and it is a good thing.

---

The issue is the CEO ripping the company off after decimating the company. Somehow he is able to do it because of collusion with the Board. Don't be so naive that you don't see this, please.

---

There are many private companies that do this also where the CEO is the largest/only shareholder. Are they ripping themselves off?!?' Conditions change. Contracts are lost. Companies figure out how to do things with fewer resources. And so on. Other layoffs happen because the company staffed up to launch a new product or anticipated more sales that didn't work out.

This is how capitalism works. The fact the US makes it easier to reduce staffing than most countries is part of why we have a much stronger economy than most countries where firing someone is almost impossible because companies can't right size costs.

Are there bad CEOs? Yes. Are there others that are overpaid? Yes. That said the stable of CEOs in this country on average are the best in the world which is why we have the best economy in the world.

---

No, that is not how capitalism works. That is how slavery and fraudulent activities work. We have normalized it so much that we can't tell which is which.

One of the biggest misconceptions I hear is "A company is only responsible to its shareholders". This is a naive way of looking at it. A company works in a geography populated by human beings. If you only take take take and don't give back, the same people will bring you down one day. Why do you think corporations "give back" and do DEI and observe February for blacks? To give people the feeling that they are giving back to society, not just taking. You think any corp cares about blacks? Or women? Or Gays? NO NO NO. If a corporation is slimy enough to bring in people from overseas while staying in America, they should just move to Bangladesh or Vietnam. Or the Government should tax them so hard that they won't know what hit them. They are after all using the land, water, infra of the local geography. Tax them harder.

We follow fake and corrupted capitalism today. Needs an overhaul.

You've claimed to make millions in investments but you're always slinging resumes and complaining about the job market. Anyone with millions doesn't need to be working for someone else. Your posts don't add up.