It's a bit of a stretch to call musical instruments - which are often handcrafted and not manufactured because an object that produces a particular sound requires tolerance that shift with the source material and that are difficult to generalize to a machine process - "soulless". On top of that handcrafting, they're objects made specifically to tap into one of the deepest parts of the human psyche (again, by hand, ephemerally). It's hard to think of something less soulless.
I dunno. Thanks to big corpo shenanigans (and, er, racism?) a lot of people have turned away from big brands (or, at least obviously brand-y brands) towards "trusted individuals" (though you might classify them as brands themselves). Who goes to PCMag anymore? It's all LTT and Marques Brownlee and any number of small creators. Or, the people on the right who abandoned broadcast and even cable news and get everything they "know" from Twitter randos. Even on this site, asks for a Google Search alternative are not rare, and you'll get about a dozen different answers each time, each with a fraction of the market share of the big guy (but growing).
In America, there is a history of using "cultural fit" as an excuse to discriminate against socially marginalized groups (both those that have and haven't escaped economic marginalization in the intervening years). So that's another criterion that Americans will have trouble with: it's difficult to be certain that your lack of "cultural fit" is something fundamental to do with your personality or work style, or if it's some aspect of your identity that is unrelated to your work performance (something that an effective, if biased, employer and team might discover if you were given a chance).
Encourage a competitive market environment where there aren't just a handful of polarized "make it" companies that everyone is applying to regardless of fit or career objective because landing a job there is a golden ticket?
Not of non-public figures, not this acerbically, not singled-out, on the front page of HN, with most of the comment section assuming that every word must be true without having ever met them. The Old Boys' Club is real and it would be career suicide.
>But once you achieve market dominance, your priorities have to shift. It's no longer "why wouldn't you try this" or "let's do the right thing." It's "why would you rock the boat and risk the nice thing we have?"
Antitrust is important, wouldn't you think?
>A cutthroat corporate environment where you're never sure about the future of your job?
This is the state that the unanointed live in, and we even often deem it beneficial (however erroneously), for the good of society, or a market reality, or whatever, so it is very much an option to be considered. I'm sure many are aghast at the thought, and my memetic response is playing a video clip of SpongeBob's Plankton exclaiming, "I went to COLLEGE!", with a wry smile on my face.
I don't disagree with most of this. The answer is definitely not simply, "Lower the budget," least of all because, as you say, they have other sources of funding. The loss of LEOs on corners probably wouldn't do much for crime rates, either, true.
But I will also answer the question you posed (in the form of an unfinished short story from a few years ago that I dropped because I realized I was doing more telling than showing (also because it's kind of terrible):
Because people have been saying, "Reform the police," for decades, and what generally happens when a "reform the police" candidate gets in office is that the police get more money for "training." So, it's not an unconsidered slogan: the problem with "reform" was that it was resulting in wealthier law enforcement that was still corrupt. Time to be more explicit about what needs to happen: do not "reform." Defund.
And, for the record, this embodies what most people meant when they said, "Defund the police." Not, "Get rid of the institution of law enforcement." Instead, "Lower funding so that the remainder is forced to be put towards necessary tasks which the police are actually effective at," reducing their ability to engage in the kind of paid apathy or harassment the GGP describes, and freeing up funding for preventative social programs. If you believed it was the former, well, you are not immune to propaganda. And no one in their right mind, even on the ACAB side, wants police to go away entirely. You don't delete a containment board.
https://youtu.be/0SvfNhMlnBE
Even "cheap Chinese shit" is made by hand.