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

151–160 of 278 posts

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

#151

Post by Method-X »

Fins wrote: post #142
deft wrote: post #116

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think everyone is well aware of that. In a successful socialist state neither party elites or bureaucrats should exist. In a capitalist state or authoritarian system those are designed and necessary groups. Most people's objections to socialism are exactly what socialism is attempting to remove. Lenin, Stalin etc. did a terrible job.

But isn't it at least a little bit curious that any and everyone trying to implement it did an equally terrible job?

Exactly. Almost like it's a problem with the fundamentals of the system itself.

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

#152

Post by mattmanser »

jumbopapa wrote: post #80
reading-at-work wrote: post #67

"The reign of the all-powerful capitalist class has returned with a vengeance. The job conditions of working men and women, thrust backward, will not improve until they regain the militancy and rebuild the popular organizations that seized power from the capitalists." ... "The ruling capitalists will be as vicious as they were in the past. Nothing enrages the rich more than having to part with a fraction of their obs…

I agree. The whole article is basically saying that it's unfair that they have competition now. Sure, cab drivers may not be making as good of a living as before, but in general everyone else has gained a lot in regards to lower fares.

America's previous taxi monopoly is skewing your view on this and have actually got nothing to do with gig economies. Uber circumvented taxi medallions AND introduced gig economy. It was the circumvention of taxi medallions that brought down your price. In countries without those insane medallions, Uber is about the same price, even when running at a loss.

When you put that aside, it's a different beast.

In the UK, DPD, who are Amazon's outsourced delivery drivers, recently killed someone because they fine "contractors" who are ill and he worked himself to death[1]. We have employment laws that protect against this that are being circumvented by 'disruptors' to kill people for minor savings.

The worst part about this, if you follow things like what happens after minimum wages are introduced, price increase are miniscule, sales don't drop. So if you look at the inverse, the misery these 'disruptions' are causing give little to consumers and are extremely damaging to society.

[1]https://www.theguardian.com/business/2018/feb/05/courier-who...

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

#153

Post by JulianMorrison »

icebraining wrote: post #148
sokoloff wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What's a living wage? $30K/yr? How many Americans are there (or just American adults)? 325M / 250M What's those two figures multiplied together? 9.8T / 7.5T What's the total federal tax revenues in 2016? 3.5T To what multiple would we need to raise taxes to pay for such a program? Raise to 3.8x current taxation levels / raise to 3.1x current taxation levels. All that assumes that basic prices wouldn't rise in an envi…

You wouldn't actually be raising taxation to those levels, because you're immediately returning much of the money. If you apply a $32k tax and a $30k refund on the tax statement, you only raised the tax $2k effectively (for that person).

You're returning it to different people though. At least if you have the common sense to tax the rich.

And in fact, that money is likely to be more economically useful in the hands of ex-poor-now-comfortable people (who will use it to study and start their dream small businesses) than being frittered or sat upon by the very wealthy.

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

#154

Post by bbddg »

throwaaawayNNV wrote: post #99
bbddg wrote: post #87

Earlier quoted context omitted.

He doesn't pay them how much their work is worth. He pays less, that's how he makes money.

Exactly. I make most of the money, not them. And the day I reduce their hours significantly because I bring AI into the platform -and one day I will-, I will make even more, and they will make even less. I don't think I am individually wrong to pay market rate for their work, and keep the surplus, but the bigger question is, while nobody is wrong, including AI, where are we going as a society? What will be the conseq…

Yeah I don't think you're individually wrong either, sorry if I came across that way. You're acting rationally in the world that we live in.

I know socialism is a dirty word (especially around here) but I think as a society we need to be open to the possibility of an economy that is fundamentally different from capitalism.

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

#155

Post by reading-at-work »

zdw wrote: post #145
jumbopapa wrote: post #80

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I agree. The whole article is basically saying that it's unfair that they have competition now. Sure, cab drivers may not be making as good of a living as before, but in general everyone else has gained a lot in regards to lower fares.

Seeing as every Uber and Lyft ride was (and still is?) subsidized by investor money, Cab vs App was never a fair competition. Replacing one problematic system with another that rearranges and changes what the problems are isn't always a net win. Assuming that any capitalist enterprise's goals will align with and optimize for the long term general health of society is frankly ludicrous.

Investment dollars aside, there's hard data to show that Uber and Lyft reduce drunk driving in any area where they operate, for one thing. It's a tangible addition to the general consensus that the apps are much better from a user experience perspective.

Additionally, plenty of expanding companies are subsidized by investor money. You could say the same of Netflix and, until recently, Amazon. The point is that investors see potential for them to become more profitable down the road - the same is true of Uber and Lyft.

Of course, you're right that Uber and Lyft are not run by saints and they will have their own problems. But so far I see it as a net gain over the old taxi system.

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

#156

Post by zombieprocesses »

prepend wrote: post #26
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…

> 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.

Maybe he was betting on the price of taxi medallions to increase considerably.

> Putting a million into medallions because they’ve risen in value for 80 years is dumb.

It's the basis of investing in a lot of assets - like NYC real estate. Limit supply will protect your investment and it will always increase. This is also the basis of dollar cost averaging into an index. The assumption is that the markets/indices will always increase in value over the long term even if it may fluctuate up and down over the short term.

> These weren’t mostly owned by mom and pop individual owners.

Yep. Regulations and limit supply will do that. Just like most of the farm subsidies benefit the mega corporations, not the small farms.

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

#157

Post by Avshalom »

cptskippy wrote: post #95
huffmsa wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 la…

> USPS benefited from national mail logistics only being available to government level endeavors. What Kool-Aid are you drinking? The Post Office didn't benefit from anything, it was mandated because no such service yet existed. Prior to the Office of the Postmaster General being established, postal service was disjointed and limited at best in the colonies. In the 1600s you had 2 routes in the colonies, Boston to En…

Actually the most recent is when congress lowered the price of stamps juuust as USPS had finally built up the pre-fund.

Which of course points to one of the many problems the USPS has which is that they're expected to be self sustaining but have almost no control over their business model (and yet miraculously they manage to make it work for the most part).

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

#158

Post by iliketosleep »

walterbell wrote: post #105
iliketosleep wrote: post #90

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, there's a massive trend towards centralization where it's winner takes all, almost like unregulated private monopolies. Government regulation can't keep up and these corporates get richer and more powerful, at the expense of the businesses they "serve". We do seem to have reached a peculiar extreme of capitalism.

What’s stopping a metasearch engine for food delivery services, with various attributes, including the restaurant’s preferred service ranking? Google Maps has started quoting ride-hailing pricing, which is a step in that direction.

That's a good point, these markets are still in their infancy and windows of opportunities will open up. This is the upside to all this "distruption".

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

#159

Post by padobson »

deft wrote: post #116
api wrote: post #84

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Consumed by greed, rendered numb to human suffering by a life of hedonism and extravagance, devoid of empathy, incapable of self-criticism or self-sacrifice, surrounded by sycophants and leeches who cater to their wishes, appetites and demands, able to use their wealth to ignore the law and destroy critics and opponents, they are among the most repugnant of the human species." This psychological shift toward delusio…

I think everyone is well aware of that. In a successful socialist state neither party elites or bureaucrats should exist. In a capitalist state or authoritarian system those are designed and necessary groups. Most people's objections to socialism are exactly what socialism is attempting to remove. Lenin, Stalin etc. did a terrible job.

Lenin, Stalin etc. did a terrible job.

I'm open to being wrong, but I don't think anyone can do a good job.

No one has yet invented a way of distributing resources more efficiently than markets. I'm not sure if socialism can be real socialism if markets are involved, but I know there's no existing solution to feed and clothe people without them. You might argue for Ptolemaic Egypt, but they had a huge advantage with the Nile, and starvation was rampant in drier years. Every 20th Century example of trying to eliminate markets either led to mass starvation or a quick return to markets once it was clear you couldn't grow an economy without them.

Sweden, Denmark, Norway and most other big government countries socialists like to point out still rely on markets to provide the economic growth needed to pay the taxes for their social programs. They also have the advantage of strong allies and needing to spend only a small fraction of their tax revenues on defense.

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

#160

Post by reading-at-work »

deft wrote: post #116
api wrote: post #84

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Consumed by greed, rendered numb to human suffering by a life of hedonism and extravagance, devoid of empathy, incapable of self-criticism or self-sacrifice, surrounded by sycophants and leeches who cater to their wishes, appetites and demands, able to use their wealth to ignore the law and destroy critics and opponents, they are among the most repugnant of the human species." This psychological shift toward delusio…

I think everyone is well aware of that. In a successful socialist state neither party elites or bureaucrats should exist. In a capitalist state or authoritarian system those are designed and necessary groups. Most people's objections to socialism are exactly what socialism is attempting to remove. Lenin, Stalin etc. did a terrible job.

"In a successful socialist state neither party elites or bureaucrats should exist."

So to paraphrase, there has never been a successful socialist state.

Post reply on HN