Live data from Hacker News

Uber and Lyft expected to prevail in CA ballot measure

cnbc.com

31–40 of 43 posts

Re: Uber and Lyft expected to prevail in CA ballot measure

#31
post #4

We just learned that it takes only $200m to buy a law in the state of California. The state legislature said these workers are employees. The state judicial system said these workers are employees. These companies wouldn't accept that as an answer so they turned to funding the most expensive proposition battle in history with 90% coming down on the one side. This is also in addition to all sorts of free marketing the…

I didn't see any ads (I mean it, I'm very wel insulated from ads in general) but I voted for it.

I did that because the uber drivers I've driven with unanimously wanted the status quo.

Re: Uber and Lyft expected to prevail in CA ballot measure

#32
post #7
post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Curious, would you apply the same logic to the other propositions that received massively disproportionate funding on one side (e.g. Prop 16) but still are failing? Perhaps the voters of California don't 100% share the views of the people elected to represent them. That is the disadvantage of first-past-the-post democracy.

From ballotpedia[1][2]: Support Prop 16 - $20m Oppose Prop 16 - $1m Support Prop 22 - $202m Oppose Prop 22 - $20m We are talking about a $19m difference verses $182m. These are in no way similar campaigns. [1] - https://ballotpedia.org/California_Proposition_16,_Repeal_Pr... [2] - https://ballotpedia.org/California_Proposition_22,_App-Based...

Why didn’t you use the ratios?

Re: Uber and Lyft expected to prevail in CA ballot measure

#33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think this is an unnecessarily cynical take. Money certainly matters in politics, but it can't buy enough votes to win on its own. The contingent of people who genuinely dislike AB5 was very motivated, and clearly sizeable

I doubt that AB5 was itself the target of much particular care. Prop 22 is viable this year because of the COVID-19 pandemic and the dire straits so many are in. It's supported by those who need any source of income they can lay claim to, no matter its quality, and by those who know someone like that, and so on. In a year (or a society) in which fewer people were so desperate, I would very much like to believe that t…

Wasn’t this put to a vote? Why do you call it “lawbuying”? Because you don’t like the result?

Re: Uber and Lyft expected to prevail in CA ballot measure

#34
post #29

Thank you to everyone in California who voted for it. This means that as a retired computer programmer, I can keep part-time Uber/Lyft driving. It's a good thing for me and the people I pick up.

That's what I thought, it should just mean more options overall. I don't understand the downside if it's always an at-will employment opportunity. Workarounds exist if one doesn't pay enough. Some people act like one app taking advantage is the end of civilization.

People complaining that $200 million was spent promoting Prop 22 don't understand that gig companies were up against some very powerful forces in California: Namely Democratic congress persons and California unions they were allied with. Unions tried to strong arm Uber and Lyft because they hoped to unionize drivers. CA lawmakers passed AB5, which was a disaster at the start because musicians could no longer pick up backing musicians when they toured, for example, and freelance writers were suddenly having a hard time getting work. Lawmakers had to carve out a bunch of exceptions. It became clear that they were only going after mainly Uber and Lyft. Most people I talked to understood AB5 was a bad law because a lot of people do extra work on the side or have family members that do.

Surveys showed most drivers wanted to stay independent. About 70% are part time drivers and wanted to continue to work where, when and for how long they wanted. Of the 30% that are full time drivers, it was never clear to me what percentage of them wanted to be employees. As I explained here [https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=24866382], many drivers who wanted employee/union protection were not very good drivers. For example, one driver the unions put in front of cameras said he only made $67 on a 12 hour shift in San Francisco. You have to be doing something very wrong to only make that much in 12 hours in San Francisco. If that were the case then the many drivers from the Central Valley wouldn't work SF. It wouldn't be worth it.

Re: Uber and Lyft expected to prevail in CA ballot measure

#35
Prop 22 was carefully crafted to give drivers enough benefits that it would reach popular support. If it just invalidated AB5 it wouldn't have passed. This means that democracy worked, instead of making gig work illegal prop 22 made gig work get guaranteed benefits without making them employees. Seems like a much better solution to me.

To me the big question is why so many democrats are against this? Why do they have to be employees instead of its own category with its own protections?

Re: Uber and Lyft expected to prevail in CA ballot measure

#36

This link doesn't deserve a post, as it contains only rumors, not any actual news. The specific line in question that clearly states this is: "according to projections from NBC News"

You can see the votes for yourself: https://results.enr.clarityelections.com/CA/Santa_Clara/1060...

Irrelevant. The source cited declared itself to be speculation based on projections, at the time that the link was posted. That they were proven right later is no excuse for bringing speculative political uncertainty to this forum. This should not have been posted at the time that it was, with the source that was used.

Re: Uber and Lyft expected to prevail in CA ballot measure

#37
post #4

We just learned that it takes only $200m to buy a law in the state of California. The state legislature said these workers are employees. The state judicial system said these workers are employees. These companies wouldn't accept that as an answer so they turned to funding the most expensive proposition battle in history with 90% coming down on the one side. This is also in addition to all sorts of free marketing the…

I think this is an unnecessarily cynical take. Money certainly matters in politics, but it can't buy enough votes to win on its own. The contingent of people who genuinely dislike AB5 was very motivated, and clearly sizeable

> but it can't buy enough votes to win on its own

Money can't buy love either, but being a billionaire makes that way, way, way easier.

So it can't buy something with 100% guarantee, but if it gets you to 90%, the difference is ... academic.

Re: Uber and Lyft expected to prevail in CA ballot measure

#38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You can see the votes for yourself: https://results.enr.clarityelections.com/CA/Santa_Clara/1060...

Irrelevant. The source cited declared itself to be speculation based on projections, at the time that the link was posted. That they were proven right later is no excuse for bringing speculative political uncertainty to this forum. This should not have been posted at the time that it was, with the source that was used.

The projections are based on the same vote tally I linked. The votes were posted at 8pm and updated every hour after that. I watched them in real time.

Re: Uber and Lyft expected to prevail in CA ballot measure

#40

Meta: should there maybe be some kind of cooldown on threads based on election results? This one seems mostly fine, but there are a few discussions soon to come that I think would very much benefit from a preemptive 24 hour time out.

That's a question you need to take to the moderators by email, using the footer Contact link. They won't see this comment otherwise and the guidelines request that.
Post reply on HN