this post was submitted on 16 Oct 2023
617 points (98.7% liked)

Technology

59300 readers
4927 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each another!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots


founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] NOT_RICK@lemmy.world 84 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Also, everyone’s doing it so it’s harder for an individual company to be vilified for it. They get to blame it on “market forces”

[–] echo64@lemmy.world 106 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Funding drying up is real, but if you see an established profit making company doing it, just remember that whenever they do layoffs, share prices rise. The execs get big bonuses for share prices, so sacrificing employees for those bonuses is worth it to them because they are parasites on society.

[–] db2@sopuli.xyz 44 points 1 year ago (3 children)

The whole stock market system is parasitic.

[–] sirboozebum@lemmy.world 21 points 1 year ago (2 children)

The current system is because it has incentives for short term profiteering over steady long term profits.

There could be tax reforms to more tax capital gains for stocks held for short periods of time and discounts for stocks sold after longer periods.

This wouldn't be a magic fix but a good first step.

[–] GeekyNerdyNerd@sh.itjust.works 15 points 1 year ago

Another thing that would help would be banning shorting stocks. Shorting makes it more profitable for investors to take a stable, profitable company that isn't experiencing exponential growth and intentionally run it into the ground than it would be to simply let it generate long term revenues.

It's obscene that we haven't banned it and acts like it writ large. It simply shouldn't be legal to sell somebody else's property that they've loaned to you with the intention of buying another one once the price drops. It provides absolutely no value to society, is incredibly risky, and creates perverse market incentives where economic recessions and market crashes can be more profitable for some than the good times.

[–] Semi-Hemi-Demigod@kbin.social 2 points 1 year ago

That still won't change the economy from exploiting workers to give value to people who've done no work at all.

[–] Transcendant@lemmy.world 10 points 1 year ago (1 children)

It's fraudulent as fuck. Hedge funds who are also market makers (oh, sure, they claim to be 'separate' yet repeatedly get fined for their behaviour, all while not admitting fault of course). Definitely no conflict of interest there. That's before we even get into 'dark pools': https://www.investopedia.com/terms/d/dark-pool.asp

When a majority of trades for many companies are conducted with zero oversight, that allows bad actors to manipulate the markets. It's madness to me that this parallel system is allowed to exist. I just picked AAPL at random, 43% of trades were made 'off-exchange' yesterday. ~22m shares traded with zero price action or regulation.

https://chartexchange.com/symbol/nasdaq-aapl/exchange-volume/

[–] db2@sopuli.xyz 3 points 1 year ago

But but but there's not zero oversight, they're self-regulated which always works! 🤡

[–] Semi-Hemi-Demigod@kbin.social 7 points 1 year ago

For a stock to go up, the company has to make more profit.

To make more profit, they need to pay their workers less than the value of the goods or services produced.

Therefore, the stock price is a measure of how well a company can exploit its workers.