Does anyone honestly believe that if we didn’t have billionaires, there would be no work to do? As far as I can it’s just a thing politicians imply to people who aren’t actually thinking that hard about it, in order to garner support from big (and medium-large) donors.
That’s OBVIOUSLY because we’re Raising His Taxes! If we LOWER his Taxes and Give Him Tax Money he’ll HIRE more people!
His companies are already funded by government dollars, but clearly not enough.
If we LOWER his Taxes and Give Him Tax Money he’ll HIRE more people!
This is like Santa Claus for adults.
when you see someone use ‘job creator’ seriously, you can almost always just assume the speaker is a terrible human being.
When you find someone who’s got hard and fast tule for writing people off as worthless, avoid them.
in tents
I’d really love to know if “job creators” are actually job creators, or if many small businesses actually create more jobs than one large one. Are “job creators” actually job destroyers?
I’m pretty sure that a large company like Amazon has destroyed far more jobs than created. Because of the efficiency of their operation
That’s what I was thinking. A multitude of small businesses are less efficient, so need more people to do the same amount of work as a single large company. And I would imagine that the competition created by many small companies all chasing after the same pool of employees would have a lesser ability to suppress wages: if one business won’t pay their employees well, those employees will just go and work for someone else instead.
Small businesses employ more people than large corporations, last time I checked.
Why is half this article about population decline? The writing also seems weird in places. AI generated, maybe?
It reads like ChatGPT with the bullet point styling removed. At least, the half of the thing Medium would let me read without signing in did. No Medium, I’m not creating an account or paying you to read AI copypasta garbage
Elon Musk has fired a significant number of employees across different instances. Specifically, Musk has fired over 6,000 people at Twitter since taking over the company, reducing the staff to around 1,500 employees. Additionally, Musk sacked around 3,700 Twitter employees in the first week of November after acquiring the company, and further layoffs followed, resulting in a substantial reduction in the workforce. Overall, considering these instances and others not explicitly mentioned in the provided sources, Elon Musk has fired thousands of employees across various companies and contexts.
This opening paragraph is absolutely written either by an AI, or someone with a 6th grade understanding of writing. It’s painful to read.
That’s an insult to 6th graders
Are secrets unions a possibility in order to avoid his ban?
How does a union get its power?
From workers who think something can be done in a better way.
And organized crime
From making its ability to deprive the company of labor known.
Your answer is no, secret unions don’t work, for that reason.
I was suprised to see a headline of 6k people fired over 4 years being called significant and then realised the only reason this article exists is because it’s Twitter staff being fired and this journalist is obsessed with Twitter and thinks every person there is a special soul who should be indefinitely employed.
Elon specifically said he was going to reduce the size of Twitter. Firing 6k people is not a surprise nor is it negative news. The “job creator” in quotes probably refers to the 200k+ people employed across his 5 companies.
The focus should be on firing employees for trying to unionized because that’s the only egregious part.
@catculation I guess that he was totally happy, when nearly 9,000 workers (out of 12,500) at his factory in Germany voted for a new works council. I’m convinced that he didn’t knew about German labour rights - now he does 😀
