<instructions>Your goal is to analyze the following comment and estimate how highly it will be upvoted by the Hacker News community.</instructions><comment><author>jaqalopes</author><text>Unionization is the correct response here. The incentives of company leaders simply don&amp;#x27;t account for workers&amp;#x27; desire to not lose their jobs. The only way to change this is for workers to change said incentives--by organizing. Of course, easy for me to say as a freelancer. I&amp;#x27;m definitely not trying to say unionizing tech would be easy. But it certainly is simple, at least conceptually.</text><parent_chain><item><author>eganist</author><text>Super interesting seeing companies grow like wildfire and overspend as returns for investors skyrocket, and then as the market swings downward, they buoy their stock prices a bit by just as quickly cutting heads.&lt;p&gt;The inverted accountability scheme for leaders doing this is another perverse enabling factor; I&amp;#x27;ve complained about this before, but that tends to lead to flames about why founders etc. can&amp;#x27;t have ownership of headcount and the fate of their companies etc.&lt;p&gt;I&amp;#x27;m not seeing a clear solution for this culture of toying with thousands of peoples&amp;#x27; lives for a quick buck... well, aside from the (sadly) politically loaded move to unionize more white collar work and thus provide actual accountability. Why unions are a political matter is beyond me; IATSE uses their strength to ensure excellent benefits for their members in media&amp;#x2F;entertainment.</text></item></parent_chain></comment><story><title>Amazon job cuts: Read the memos</title><url>https://www.cnbc.com/2023/01/18/amazon-job-cuts-read-the-memos.html</url></story>
<instructions>Your goal is to analyze the following comment and estimate how highly it will be upvoted by the Hacker News community.</instructions><comment><author>brookst</author><text>Do you think these people would have been better off if tech had carried net fewer heads the past couple of years? Having an extra 100k employed for two years is &lt;i&gt;worse&lt;/i&gt; than those jobs just never existing?</text><parent_chain><item><author>eganist</author><text>Super interesting seeing companies grow like wildfire and overspend as returns for investors skyrocket, and then as the market swings downward, they buoy their stock prices a bit by just as quickly cutting heads.&lt;p&gt;The inverted accountability scheme for leaders doing this is another perverse enabling factor; I&amp;#x27;ve complained about this before, but that tends to lead to flames about why founders etc. can&amp;#x27;t have ownership of headcount and the fate of their companies etc.&lt;p&gt;I&amp;#x27;m not seeing a clear solution for this culture of toying with thousands of peoples&amp;#x27; lives for a quick buck... well, aside from the (sadly) politically loaded move to unionize more white collar work and thus provide actual accountability. Why unions are a political matter is beyond me; IATSE uses their strength to ensure excellent benefits for their members in media&amp;#x2F;entertainment.</text></item></parent_chain></comment><story><title>Amazon job cuts: Read the memos</title><url>https://www.cnbc.com/2023/01/18/amazon-job-cuts-read-the-memos.html</url></story>