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

'The Gig Economy' Is the New Term for Serfdom

truthdig.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 278 posts

Re: 'The Gig Economy' Is the New Term for Serfdom

#21

Post by troupe »

WhompingWindows wrote: post #6

Serfdom is not a good comparison. Serfs were essentially slaves required to work the land, they did not choose to do so at hours that suited them, which is a key "feature" of the gig economy. They also were required to work mines, logging, or whatever service the lord of the manor wished. Let's say you worked for ride-shaes the same hours as a serf, something like sunrise to sunset. If you drove an Uber in my city fo…

Agreed. Some people are concerned with getting people out of absolute poverty. This includes things like access to clean water, a roof to sleep under, the ability to not die at 30, etc. Other people are concerned about the spread of income. They don't want to see someone making millions of dollars when someone else is making $20k. In the US, for the most part, people are not living in absolute poverty.

Re: 'The Gig Economy' Is the New Term for Serfdom

#22

Post by carlmr »

gambiting wrote: post #8
pjc50 wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because the medallion was a capital asset he was working to produce income, in the same manner as some people own trucks of about that value?

I can only assume he didn't buy it for 1.1 million dollars. If you bought a truck for say $100k, but after few years its value rose to $1.1M, I'd also recommend selling the truck instead of relying on the idea that the truck will retain its value and support retirement.

He probably bought it on a huge loan for 1 million, and you can't just retire on the difference.

Re: 'The Gig Economy' Is the New Term for Serfdom

#23

Post by ptero »

Most taxi drivers must work very long hours to earn enough to live on -- the driver mentioned reportedly worked 100-120 hour weeks for 14 years. While it may be OK to do this for a short time, doing this as a lifestyle is not good for a society not at war.

Such jobs should be replaced by technology / gigs / something else. Being displaced by the technology is painful for the folks affected, but we should focus on minimizing transition pain for those affected (money, training, relocation, other help), not on blasting companies challenging this insanity.

Re: 'The Gig Economy' Is the New Term for Serfdom

#24

Post by samastur »

shusson wrote: post #7

> Travis Kalanick, the former CEO of Uber and one of the founders, has a net worth of $4.8 billion. I agree that the working conditions of workers should improve but I never understand the comparison to the value of CEOs. Travis Kalanick isn't sleeping on $4.8 billion, it's in the economy.

Why does that even matter?

Admittedly people like me have a larger proportion of our wealth pinned down in things like real-estate, but it's not like most of us stuff cash in shoe boxes around house. Once you discount accommodation and personal cars, most of us have the rest "in the economy".

Re: 'The Gig Economy' Is the New Term for Serfdom

#25

Post by troupe »

CaptainZapp wrote: post #16
gambiting wrote: post #3

I was mostly agreeing with the article until this part: "His medallion, once worth $1.1 million, had plummeted in value to $180,000. The dramatic drop in the value of the medallion, which he had hoped to lease for $3,000 a month or sell to finance his retirement, wiped out his economic security. He faced financial ruin and poverty. And he was not alone." The medalions are stupid and shouldn't exist. Relying on their…

What about those thousands of Enron employees who lost their life savings because they "gambled" on the fact that their retirement savings will be invested responsibly? I don't think his idea was such a massive gamble when he paid that money for the medallion. You can argue about the system as such. But I don't think his idea was unreasonable.

Who were they trusting to responsibly invest it other than themselves? I thought the people who lost were the ones who had it all invested in Enron. I'm not aware of any financial advisor who would consider this responsibly invested.

Re: 'The Gig Economy' Is the New Term for Serfdom

#26

Post by prepend »

gambiting wrote: post #3

I was mostly agreeing with the article until this part: "His medallion, once worth $1.1 million, had plummeted in value to $180,000. The dramatic drop in the value of the medallion, which he had hoped to lease for $3,000 a month or sell to finance his retirement, wiped out his economic security. He faced financial ruin and poverty. And he was not alone." The medalions are stupid and shouldn't exist. Relying on their…

It also seems like leasing a 1.1M asset for 36k/year is poor retirement planning. 3.2% pre tax won’t ler you live that well.

Seems like an odd emotional link. That we’re supposed to support this person’s edge retirement plan by making hailing cabs suck for users.

What if someone invested in Exxon. Spent $1.1M and was relying on the dividend yield (4.6% btw-http://www.dividend.com/dividend-stocks/basic-materials/majo...). And in twenty years renewables make Exxon tank.

Would we feel sympathy? I would, a little as people losing their life’s savings is sad.

But investing your whole nest egg in one thing is bad. Investing it in a thing that causes misery is even worse. Investing in a thing with artificial scarcity is further worse.

Putting a million into medallions because they’ve risen in value for 80 years is dumb. The article is also disingenuous as there were lots of investment firms buying these. Why only show this one example of a single owner.

This guy’s firm owned 500 in 2005, valued at $200M. https://www.nysun.com/business/new-york-citys-biggest-owner-...

This was a $5B market back then if all 13,605 medallions were worth $400k each. These weren’t mostly owned by mom and pop individual owners.

Re: 'The Gig Economy' Is the New Term for Serfdom

#27

Post by huffmsa »

refurb wrote: post #14
gambiting wrote: post #3

I was mostly agreeing with the article until this part: "His medallion, once worth $1.1 million, had plummeted in value to $180,000. The dramatic drop in the value of the medallion, which he had hoped to lease for $3,000 a month or sell to finance his retirement, wiped out his economic security. He faced financial ruin and poverty. And he was not alone." The medalions are stupid and shouldn't exist. Relying on their…

To be honest, I actually feel bad for medallion owners, even if the medallion system is a bad one. The gov't sets ups a system, tells you the rules and says "if you buy an expensive medallion, you can drive a cab and make a living". The value of the medallion is purely based on the gov't promise to maintain the system. So you buy one (or many) and a few years later someone does a work around and the gov't says "oh we…

Yes, it's purely based on artificial scarcity. Which historical never lasts.

PanAm went bust because they banked on price fixed airline tickets.

USPS benefited from national mail logistics only being available to government level endeavors.

DeBeers is about to get crushed by artificial diamonds which are both cheaper and "better diamonds" than the massive stockpile they've accumulated.

The rocket industry has long labored under the delusion that massive government contracts underwriting their $100m launch prices keep them safe. But their bubble is popping one $60m Falcon 9 launch at a time.

And finally, the government will support whatever brings in the most taxes and f̶r̶e̶e̶ ̶s̶p̶e̶c̶i̶a̶l̶-̶i̶n̶t̶e̶r̶e̶s̶t̶ lobbyist dinners.

Re: 'The Gig Economy' Is the New Term for Serfdom

#29

Post by adventured »

refurb wrote: post #14
gambiting wrote: post #3

I was mostly agreeing with the article until this part: "His medallion, once worth $1.1 million, had plummeted in value to $180,000. The dramatic drop in the value of the medallion, which he had hoped to lease for $3,000 a month or sell to finance his retirement, wiped out his economic security. He faced financial ruin and poverty. And he was not alone." The medalions are stupid and shouldn't exist. Relying on their…

To be honest, I actually feel bad for medallion owners, even if the medallion system is a bad one. The gov't sets ups a system, tells you the rules and says "if you buy an expensive medallion, you can drive a cab and make a living". The value of the medallion is purely based on the gov't promise to maintain the system. So you buy one (or many) and a few years later someone does a work around and the gov't says "oh we…

> The value of the medallion is purely based on the gov't promise to maintain the system.

There was never a government promise or guarantee to maintain the system as was. There was nothing more than a hope that they would.

How is that any better than building your business around assuming Google was never going to change or improve their search algorithms pre Panda/Penguin? Or betting on newspaper classified ads never going away. Or a thousand other examples like that from the last century. One of the more common requirements of staying in business, is managing to adapt with change.

The only alternative is for the government to try to freeze technological progress for the benefit of a few and at the expense of the many. Except that's impossible, the rest of the global economy will destroy you, leaving you in the stone age.

Re: 'The Gig Economy' Is the New Term for Serfdom

#30

Post by maxxxxx »

WhompingWindows wrote: post #6

Serfdom is not a good comparison. Serfs were essentially slaves required to work the land, they did not choose to do so at hours that suited them, which is a key "feature" of the gig economy. They also were required to work mines, logging, or whatever service the lord of the manor wished. Let's say you worked for ride-shaes the same hours as a serf, something like sunrise to sunset. If you drove an Uber in my city fo…

Do you realize how obnoxiously condescending the line "look how good you have it over the people a few hundred years ago" is? How about we give that line to people who already have a lot but always want more? No, it's only used against the little guy who dares to want a decent life.
Post reply on HN