Not in those words, no. But if you're that resentful about being laid off, and talking to the media about what a cosmic injustice it is rather than, "oh, well, I guess I can start spending some of the interest on the fortune I built up from 16 years at Google", then yes, you do still need the job badly.
I don't think he talked to the media. The article appears to just be quoting from his LinkedIn post, and other parts of his LinkedIn page. Also I'm not sure he's saying it's a cosmic injustice.
There are reasons beyond compensation to like a job (fulfillment, relationships, status, etc). If you want to do Google-scale anything, at best you've got 4 other companies to choose from. So you're going to feel hurt if you lose that opportunity for reasons you feel are beyond your control. Especially if you've put 16 years into it and you feel the loyalty is due back.
People who are laid off or fired can get mad for a variety of reasons other than those three you listed. Someone I know worked a lot to build a particular business and was promised by the owner that he'd always have a position there. Then he was let go when the economy went bad. He felt betrayed. Betrayal engenders anger, too.
>Hm? If you need work and are laid off you don't get mad: you get another job.
Some people do both -- from the context, it sounds like Moore also hopes to replace it with a similar job, while also venting to anyone in the media who will propagate his framing about what a horrible injustice it is that Google can pay him a fortune and keep him around for 16 years.
>You get mad if you were working for prestige, connections, or power-- things you can't just replace by getting another job.
And this fits your model of someone eager to trade personal time for the prospect of power even when his material needs are met? From the link:
>>"This also just drives home that work is not your life, and employers — especially big, faceless ones like Google — see you as 100% disposable," Moore said.
> hopes to replace it with a similar job, while also venting to anyone in the media
If so, it's a foolish move! Venting in public absolutely makes someone less employable -- making it a freedom that people with less need of employment have more of!
> And this fits your model of someone eager
I don't know him so I could only speculate and I don't really have any speculation specific to him to offer.
The reason I replied was to dispute the position you took that being mad meant he needed the job. I stated it too strongly: I should have just said "people can get mad about losing a job even when they don't need it, e.g. if they were working for prestige, connections, or power-- probably more so since these are things you can't just replace by getting another job."
In other words needing it may be sufficient, but it's not necessary. I think those other reasons are stronger reasons to be mad-- they're harder to replace than a job.
> "This also just drives home that work is not your life, and employers — especially big, faceless ones like Google — see you as 100% disposable," "Live life, not work," he added.
I've heard statements just like that from people who I know have eight figure net worths and continue to work for someone else. ::shrugs::
