> Laying off people also doesn't reduce cost as much as it might look like. There is a lot of hidden cost shared by everyone (also the companies that did the lay offs are hit by them). Unemployed people still have to eat and pay rent, and someone is paying for that. They spend less money on services and goods, which affects every company in the end.

Poor companies missing out on consumer money.

It’s funny to think about. One might lose their apartment because they can’t pay rent. Then they’re homeless. What does that mean? As long as they are eating, at least some moeny is circulating. Maybe not as much because of dumpster diving and things like that. Meanwhile what was lost? One less family to pay for rent. Which means that an apartment is vacant. And rent is mostly not productive. It is mostly rent on estate ownership.

The first level of destituness (for renters at least) might not lead to less productive money circulating. But less rent money. Then when that happens to enough people you simply have more vacant apartments. Okay, a little loss of productive circulation since no one is wearing out the floors etc.