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

71–80 of 104 posts

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

#71

Post by jahaja »

dalbasal wrote: post #63
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…

I think the gig economy is just a modern addition to day labouring, peacmeeal work and such. These segments have always existed. In many cases, they have played a positive role. When "Labour" (unions and political movements) get heavy handed, they try to kill off these segments. They don't fit into the model. They want to promote job stability above all else, where workers have a right to their job in as close to per…

> They want to promote job stability above all else

No, please no. The labour movement want(ed) good living conditions for the majority rather than for the few. And yes, to not be fired by the whim of the bosses daily feeling is part of that, but not "above all else". And ofc these kind of jobs is the enemy of the labour movement, because it's exactly the opposite of what's been fought for in the last ~150 years.

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

#72

Post by WheelsAtLarge »

cbhl wrote: post #41
robotresearcher wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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. Just a few years ago there was a big push in this direction. MOOCs reduced the price of access to college level material close to zero [1]. There is more to it than access, of course. [1] edit: following others, notably MIT, who have been releasing great stuff for free…

It turns out that course material is only one of the things you learn in college. And it's not the one that is necessarily a predictor of being gainfully employed.

Very true, some of the classes have very little value. I can go to any auditorium based class and sit in the class and the professor would likely not know. The TA's might but mostly I can be there and learn. There are no security guards. What people pay for is that final grade and the degree you are working to get. You can even hang out on campus. When I was getting my degree there were always former students that would hang out.That was there base of operation.

Strange how it works.

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

#73

Post by jahaja »

rtx wrote: post #69
jahaja wrote: post #68

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So the idea is to make things cheaper for the poor by lowering their wages?

Yes, that reduces the cost of production. Everyone can be paid a high salary and produce expensive stuff. Or low salary and cheap stuff. Both of them are valid solutions. But due to the current concentration of wealth in rich countries we are seeing preference for one of them.

So the wages of the poor is dynamic, but the profit margins etc are static by some force of nature?

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

#74

Post by Ntrails »

KaiserPro wrote: post #57

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…

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

AirBnB definitely still counts here, if the charge is dodging tax/regulatory costs. A high proportion of offerings are either intentionally or unknowingly avoiding the various restrictions and/or costs associated with running a short term let business.

It's not just workers rights, it's the societal contributions of paying employee tax.

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

#75

Post by rtx »

jahaja wrote: post #73
rtx wrote: post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, that reduces the cost of production. Everyone can be paid a high salary and produce expensive stuff. Or low salary and cheap stuff. Both of them are valid solutions. But due to the current concentration of wealth in rich countries we are seeing preference for one of them.

So the wages of the poor is dynamic, but the profit margins etc are static by some force of nature?

Yes, because capital is more fluid.

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

#76

Post by rtx »

KaiserPro wrote: post #57

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…

Workers shouldn't have more rights than humans.

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

#77

Post by 4c2383f5c88e911 »

rtx wrote: post #76
KaiserPro wrote: post #57

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…

Workers shouldn't have more rights than humans.

Humans shouldn't have less rights than workers.

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

#79

Post by bko »

KaiserPro wrote: post #57

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…

Employers can't be forced to hire workers, so I don't think "worker's rights" is the right term. What restrictions to employment such as holidays, sick pay and maternity care actually mean is that workers are unable to negotiate on those grounds. For instance, if a single female in her early 30s is interviewing for a position, she is unable to tell waive her right to maternity care by telling her employer that she does not intend to have children. If she were to have children, her employer would not be able to legally deny her maternity benefits, making her promise unenforceable. Employers can get around paying some benefits by preferring to hire men, who are statistically less likely to take the full extent of their mandated paternity benefits.

So I think in some sense "worker's rights" is more a restriction on worker's right to negotiate. It's fine if people think that a regulatory body has a role in restricting the types of things that can be negotiated, but let's not talk about it as "worker's rights"

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

#80

Post by csmark »

jclulow wrote: post #29
byoung2 wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Also, the upfront or ongoing costs of using some of these platforms, like AirBnB or Uber where you might have a mortgage or car payment that far exceeds your earnings. A $1000 a month mortgage to make $924 a month isn't profitable.

At least the partially covered mortgage on a domicile might lead to increased equity in an asset with some long term retained, or even increasing, value. The car financing case seems much more dubious.

Partially covered mortgage means the bank will eventually foreclose. They take the house and, zero out the equity the owner may have, and take any asset value increase and pocket it all.
Post reply on HN