Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

How Much Are People Making from the Sharing Economy?

priceonomics.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 104 posts

Re: How Much Are People Making from the Sharing Economy?

#51

Post by mtsr »

nickthemagicman wrote: post #38
tommynicholas wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The somewhat optimistic view of these "gigs" is that they have two important qualities: - They can be picked up/put down at any time - They require no specific time commitment and can be managed in parallel with other money making endeavors/jobs Most "jobs" are actually difficult to get (go try to get a job as a waiter - you probably need to know someone), require a very specific time commitment, and if you decide yo…

The problem is less with the qualities of the job and more with the pay of the job. It's poverty wages and exploitative. It's not profiting off these people, it's profiteering off of them.

Indeed and additionally they're taking work away from people with previously reasonably paying work (cab drivers, etc). Some of these really are zero-sum games and the gig economy is destroying pay in these.

Re: How Much Are People Making from the Sharing Economy?

#52

Post by atemerev »

nickthemagicman wrote: post #38
tommynicholas wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The somewhat optimistic view of these "gigs" is that they have two important qualities: - They can be picked up/put down at any time - They require no specific time commitment and can be managed in parallel with other money making endeavors/jobs Most "jobs" are actually difficult to get (go try to get a job as a waiter - you probably need to know someone), require a very specific time commitment, and if you decide yo…

The problem is less with the qualities of the job and more with the pay of the job. It's poverty wages and exploitative. It's not profiting off these people, it's profiteering off of them.

Low wages are the result of competition. If nearly everybody can be a waiter, and the demand is limited, there are two options: the salary would be very low, OR: there will be very few jobs (the imposed minimum salary case). This is mathematics, you can't change that.

You can subsidize these low-income jobs, but this is expensive and unsustainable (by definition, there are a lot of low-income people who need to be subsidized).

The only way out of the situation is to raise demand, and sharing economy does exactly that. In the days before (except maybe in the NYC), taxis were used relatively rarely; now, Uber is ubiquitous and used without hesitation in many places.

Re: How Much Are People Making from the Sharing Economy?

#53

Post by eecc »

vinaybn wrote: post #48
SirLJ wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The alternative is to get educated and get thinking about starting a real business instead of this part time addictive pitty of income... it's like saying to the addict it is his fault he is spending all his money on drugs...

Is the addict not even partly at fault for spending all his money on drugs??!

Let's not get started with the moralistic stance will we? Poverty is most often due to - especially in societies with precious little social safety nets - accidents of life, hereditarity. Very few fall deservedly, most are thrown or kept down

Re: How Much Are People Making from the Sharing Economy?

#54

Post by didibus »

SirLJ wrote: post #17

The sharing economy is evil. The only making money are the big corporations, the little guy is slaving for bellow minimum wage and taking all the risk on top of that...

As I see it, there used to be little guys and even littler guys. Now the income of the little guy is shared among all little and littler, resulting in an averaging. It's hard to judge which is worse.

If we're lucky, this will actually bubble up, and we can better share the medium and the big guys work also.

Re: How Much Are People Making from the Sharing Economy?

#55

Post by icebraining »

frgtpsswrdlame wrote: post #20
sokoloff wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I suspect a lot of those low-hour, occasional drivers were going to have all of the fixed costs of the vehicle anyway and are only looking to cover the marginal costs. That's a perfectly reasonable strategy and the fact that they aren't covering average cost is irrelevant, so long as they're covering the marginal costs of driving Uber/Lyft.

I think those low cost drivers, if they even think about it, believe they're more than covering their marginal costs. They idea that they're essentially paying depreciation plus a small premium to themselves would not go over well if it were more apparent. Perhaps what we need is another anti-ride-sharing calculator where you can plug in a whole bunch of details about your car and insurance, normal driving habits and…

Such calculators already exist: https://www.finder.com.au/uber-driver-income-calculator

Re: How Much Are People Making from the Sharing Economy?

#56

Post by icebraining »

SirLJ wrote: post #17

The sharing economy is evil. The only making money are the big corporations, the little guy is slaving for bellow minimum wage and taking all the risk on top of that...

That's very dependent on the specific service and on the person's situation. AirBNB, for example, can provide a very decent income for the work needed, much better than any alternative use of the property and time.

Re: How Much Are People Making from the Sharing Economy?

#57

Post by KaiserPro »

In the UK at least, the "sharing" economy is basically a way of paying employees less.

There are two types of employment, contracted employees (that is employees that are directly employed by a company) and "self employed" (where the employee creates a single person company, which the employer then contracts)

the reason why "self employed" is popular amongst the gig employers is not because its "flexible" its because its cheap.

There is a side effect that employees have less rights(no holiday pay, maternity cover, sick pay) However the simple fact is that employers pay less national insurance (social care and health tax, effectively)

The lack of holiday means 10% less wage, no sick pay means 100% efficiency, which important for cycle courier companies like uber eats, deliveroo.

Basically the sharing economy in the UK (with the exception of airBnB) is a way of undermining works rights to save money.

Re: How Much Are People Making from the Sharing Economy?

#58

Post by WheelsAtLarge »

vacri wrote: post #47
WheelsAtLarge wrote: post #23

I think people are missing the point of the article. I summarize that the sharing economy is not a good way to make a living. In search for the lowest price we have people that can't make enough to get an apartment and raise a family. Raising a family has become a luxury for some people. Try to raise 2 kids and you fall into poverty status. The scary part is that it's possible to see a future where a big chunk of the…

> Try to raise 2 kids and you fall into poverty status. When was this never the case? Kids have always been costly, and families in poverty have always had kids.

But should that continue to be the case? Poverty is not a plus in any society. We all know the problems poverty brings with it. The new economy should not add to the problem. It should help solve it. We'll never get past the multi-level economy. There will always be the people at the top and the people at the bottom. We mostly feel that those that work hard to get ahead should not be treated at the level as someone that has not. We project laziness on the poor but that's not necessarily the case. So, if you have the motivation to work should poverty be your reward? I say no.

Re: How Much Are People Making from the Sharing Economy?

#59

Post by WheelsAtLarge »

atemerev wrote: post #52
nickthemagicman wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The problem is less with the qualities of the job and more with the pay of the job. It's poverty wages and exploitative. It's not profiting off these people, it's profiteering off of them.

Low wages are the result of competition. If nearly everybody can be a waiter, and the demand is limited, there are two options: the salary would be very low, OR: there will be very few jobs (the imposed minimum salary case). This is mathematics, you can't change that. You can subsidize these low-income jobs, but this is expensive and unsustainable (by definition, there are a lot of low-income people who need to be su…

It's not a matter of subsidizing. We all need a base from where to work. There was a time when people worked 7 days a week, were forced to work over 40 hours a week without additional compensation, no vacations, no health insurance and work safety was iffy. Thanks to unions and an improving economy things changed. The gig economy is bringing some of us back to that. Where is the improvement we hoped tech was supposed to bring. We have a chance to make things better but we are not choosing to do it.

Money is not everything. I know society is better when people are healthy and happy than when they are not. The gig economy is not helping society it's making life more difficult for those that have no choice on what job they can get.

Re: How Much Are People Making from the Sharing Economy?

#60

Post by 5thaccount »

WheelsAtLarge wrote: post #23

I think people are missing the point of the article. I summarize that the sharing economy is not a good way to make a living. In search for the lowest price we have people that can't make enough to get an apartment and raise a family. Raising a family has become a luxury for some people. Try to raise 2 kids and you fall into poverty status. The scary part is that it's possible to see a future where a big chunk of the…

Is any of this supported by evidence that "a big chunk of the economy (will be) powered by gigs"? I doubt it is true, and I believe your conclusion is likely off, even though I agree with (what I think are) your implied goals. Let me explain why.

> I wish the new tech entrepreneurs would find a better way to fix the low skill problem rather than find a way to reduce services/costs to the bone.

I doubt these low skill workers are the gig economy workers. Many people on AirBnB are doing fairly well, as no one wants to stay in the Ghetto, and the places with high take up are relatively well off places (London, NYC, SF). Ditto Uber, which requires a car under a certain age - is it 5 years? - not the sort of bombs truly poor people have.

The Minimum wage is a good comparison point here: http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2014/09/08/who-makes-mi...

> Just who are minimum-wage workers, anyway? ... people at or below the federal minimum are:

> Disproportionately young: 50.4% are ages 16 to 24; 24% are teenagers (ages 16 to 19). > Mostly (77%) white; nearly half are white women. > Largely part-time workers (64% of the total).

The problem isn't that minimum wage is unlivable - it is that some people can't get a job. Increasing minimum wage doesn't help people who can't get a job at all.

Similarly, the gig economy isn't reducing the cost of services for people who currently do it. Rather, it is an extra source for people who already make OK money. There aren't a lot of poor people living in the Haidt, or NYC, two places where I have taken AirBnB places, and there aren't a lot of people looking to rent a room in Gary, Indiana. Or Nairobi. Or Soweto.

That's the real issue - not the cost reductions in rich areas, but finding a way to engage people who don't have a way in to the economy at all. I'd say this is not even a low skilled issue, I'd almost say it os a no skilled, combined with a no history (as in no work history) workers' problem. The gig economy isn't really affecting these people, as it seems more likely to me to be a way to prop up middle class people and make their lives slightly better, rather than a way-in for these almost-no-skilled workers.

Just as an increase in minimum wage isn't the panacea to poverty alleviation, if it does much of anything at all, so addressing the gig economy, when so many of the means of making money have rather high barriers to entry, isn't going to fix much.

I have no answers BTW, I just think the suppliers to the gig economy aren't the group - poor, low skilled people - that is the common perception, and this mis-alignment of who we need to help and HOW we help them is sending people in the wrong direction.

Post reply on HN