543
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 22 Feb 2024
543 points (95.9% liked)
Technology
57226 readers
3976 users here now
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Our Rules
- Follow the lemmy.world rules.
- Only tech related content.
- Be excellent to each another!
- Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
- Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
- Politics threads may be removed.
- No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
- Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
- Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
Approved Bots
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
I don't understand how it works out for them though. Hiring is so much more expensive than retaining staff, not just the higher salary, but the loss of productivity from losing someone with institutional knowledge and needing to train the new person which can take a really long time to get them up to speed.
You're using logic, and that may trip you up here.
Hiring is spread out into different cost buckets, whereas a 20% hit to one resource's payroll stays in payroll.
You see if you slice the cake enough times. There becomes more cake.
That's called accounting.
Many of the most wealthy and powerful companies in our world have never made a profit. Many times, companies succeed by currying the favor of the rich and powerful more so than anything else.