291–300 of 423 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Thousands of rides is not "without even a shred of data". You, on the other hand, have no data, yet seem to be very outspoken on the topic. If anyone is a bot in this conversation, it is you.
Oh I have like 9000 rides, so since I claim that it must be true and now my opinions turn to facts according to you. Cool.
As a retired programmer who drives Lyft/Uber, it's always interesting to hear my liberal programmer friends take the side of the "working class" drivers against the Big Brother-ish Big Tech companies. I might have been one of them in the past. I'll probably be one of them in the future when self-driving cars replace drivers. But for now... Most of the drivers who don't make enough money are bad at their job. Californ…
Anecdotally: 100% counter to what virtually every Lyft driver who drives full-time has told me. Data-wise: Where is your evidence? I thought that by now, the free market would have solved all of the above problems? Philosophically: No one's job should be dependent on tips. Tips ALWAYS are filtered via biases that tap into sexism, racism, xenophobia, and never a financially responsible way of building an economy. Vote…
Is it a matter of guilt? You feel guilty for having a decent paying job when not everybody does, and this seems like a silver bullet to fix everything?
A majority of drivers support prop 22, I don’t understand how more people don’t weigh that into their decision making. To you, you want to stick it to the greedy bastards at Uber by forcing this law through, and if it runs them out of business all the better. Have you considered there are millions of drivers that would actually like to keep their ability to work, and this is not just a big virtue signaling exercise to them like it is to you?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's complicated, really. Some drivers drive like 80+ hours a week. If they become employees, they will not be able to.
And i think it's OK. There is a reason why professional truck drivers must not drive longer than specified amount of time without taking breaks. Work safety regulations are usually written in blood.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Many people sell stuff on eBay as their full time job too. I don't find this line of reasoning compelling if you want to single out Uber and Lyft specifically. What is the amount of hours they should work to not be "employees"? 5? Ok Uber and Lyft can limit the hours you drive to 5. Is that fine then? I'd actually say though that what you identified (gig worker for Amazon warehouses) might be desirable if we had many…
A few points. It's not just benefits that employees receive, it's also taxes paid on employees. Moving benefits out of employment is a good idea, but if that happened, the taxes to fund these services would come from employers again. So Uber would still be more or less leeching off of society by not paying its share of social funds Secondly, the discussion of hours, while potentially having some philosophical merit,…
> If there's a cap on hours, you've now got a competing interest which says there's an incentive to NOT work while the market isn't surging- because you might cost yourself greater earnings down the line.
Ok so then is the cap 8 hours? 10? Is it 7? It seems to me that you're inventing more problems to solve a different problem than is worthwhile. You can have more drivers doing less hours, if the economics of it work (and neither of us know whether or not it does, and ironically enough I doubt the State of California does either). The point isn't to move goal posts around a set number of hours, the point is to illustrate that is exactly what you're advocating for.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
>California has the curve ball of the proposition system. That is where special interest is most heavily felt. This court ruling is mostly meaningless. There is a proposition on the ballot that directly addresses this employment/independent contractor issue. It would supersede the legislature and make it nearly impossible for the legislature to repeal or amend the law. The prop also happens to have the most expensive…
On the other hand, California also created a bill that targets two companies specifically; kind of its own special interest if you will. We saw how quickly they started carving out exceptions once the original bill was passed and comedians couldn’t perform, and journalists started getting let go. Why not just pass the bill and call it the “Uber and Lyft must pay their drivers like employees and let them act like inde…
And it's not like California just decided to target those two companies for fun. Labor unions lobbied Lorena Gonzalez to get AB5 passed so that they could have more dues paying members. So there's a clear special interest responsible for AB5.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> casting an informed vote is quite arduous for the average person This argument always comes up when discussing direct democracy or similar ideas, but it completely collapses under even the most basic scrutiny! Direct voting is strictly better than delegated voting, because you can always ... wait for it ... delegate your vote! You don’t care enough about the issue to educate yourself? Simply cast the vote for the o…
> This argument always comes up when discussing direct democracy or similar ideas, but it completely collapses under even the most basic scrutiny! > Direct voting s strictly better than delegated voting, because you can always ... wait for it ... delegate your vote! You don’t care enough about the issue to educate yourself? Simply cast the vote for the option your government/party/favourite expert recommends! After a…
As a retired programmer who drives Lyft/Uber, it's always interesting to hear my liberal programmer friends take the side of the "working class" drivers against the Big Brother-ish Big Tech companies. I might have been one of them in the past. I'll probably be one of them in the future when self-driving cars replace drivers. But for now... Most of the drivers who don't make enough money are bad at their job. Californ…
Do you work for a PR company?
AB5 has been a total disaster. The number of special cased carve-outs is ridiculous - it's not a normal law. Obviously AB5 was hacked together by some special interests (unions maybe - what is history?). It's totally unworkable. The carveouts that keep coming are the sign of this - how many are there now, anyone have the list? And yes, I'm a maxed out dem donor. If AB5 is the way workers rights are going to be advanc…
Reminder that the Democratic party, like all others, is an IRS-registered business, and like all others, has only one goal: to make money. It’s not a sacred oath to save the world. It’s a taco stand next to a hot dog vendor. They make money. Maybe they have a big customer. It’s probably not you. You’re a good customer but you’ll never eat a hot dog, so they don’t have to change their menu for you.
As a retired programmer who drives Lyft/Uber, it's always interesting to hear my liberal programmer friends take the side of the "working class" drivers against the Big Brother-ish Big Tech companies. I might have been one of them in the past. I'll probably be one of them in the future when self-driving cars replace drivers. But for now... Most of the drivers who don't make enough money are bad at their job. Californ…
With all due respect, my experience has been the complete opposite of yours. Do you by chance have any evidence for these claims or are they simply your best guess asserted as fact?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yet many drivers do this full time. Why should ride share companies be excluded from worker protections that apply to other companies? Could Amazon convert to a gig-economy for warehouse workers where you sign up via an app? There are certainly some folks who drive just a few hours a week and the companies like to highlight that by releasing stats like “% of drivers drive less then 5 hours”. I think “% of driver time…
It's complicated, really. Some drivers drive like 80+ hours a week. If they become employees, they will not be able to.