Live data from Hacker News

Gig economy companies spent more than $200M to bankroll Proposition 22

theguardian.com

231–240 of 401 posts

Re: Gig economy companies spent more than $200M to bankroll Proposition 22

#231
post #140

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why? I broke my leg. Why can't I work with my hands?

you really don't see how weak this counterpoint is? e.g. if you break your hands what exactly are you going to do with your legs?

> if you break your hands what exactly are you going to do with your legs?

Buy a two person bike and be the pedal power for a bike courier?

Re: Gig economy companies spent more than $200M to bankroll Proposition 22

#232
This doesn't address the bigger problem that is AB5, which never should have been passed in the first place. How many more carve outs do we need before AB5 is basically gutted? How many more millions of dollars need to be spent to overturn this tyrannical law? Seems like that money could be put to better use. We don't need government controlling our freedom to work when and how we desire.

Re: Gig economy companies spent more than $200M to bankroll Proposition 22

#233

My husband drives for Uber, and I’m glad the proposition passed as it is. He drives the way Uber was originally envisioned. He goes out some nights if there’s a surge, and in the morning on the way to work he points the app toward our stores and grabs a person (pre-pandemic) or a food delivery (today) on his way in. It pays for gas money, car maintenance, and then some. Some months he makes a few hundred dollars. Som…

Your husband is very fortunate; I’ve never met someone who drives for Uber and is not doing it full-time. Wishing it wasn’t that way doesn’t make it so.

She and her husband have 5 computer repair shops (according to her bio here), so either all of them are doing bad or this is just a small fraction of their income. This is an extremely outlier that you should count for little or nothing in the definition of a policy.

Re: Gig economy companies spent more than $200M to bankroll Proposition 22

#234
post #218

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I too wish roads could somehow be shared spaces again. But let's not fall into these simplistic black and white anti-establishment narratives. The automobile massively expanded personal liberty and employment options. Some of these effects were very pro-worker, like reducing the power of the dominant employers of localities, by letting workers more easily pull up stakes and find a new home in a different locality, or…

Labor market fluidity isn't pro-worker, it's an essential component of the commodification of labor. It simply means the shape of a person's life is more fully suborned to the demands of the market. It means competing on a national and often international market for wages. A workforce full of transplants is much less likely to organize and resist the agenda of capital than one with deep community roots and support st…

You're once again framing a nuanced phenomenon in terms of a simplistic oppressor/oppressed narrative. The fluidity of labor does not imply the commodification of labor. It implies a wider market for it, which has benefits like increasing the liquidity accessible to those with labor to sell. This marketization of labor was partially responsible for wages increasing over 20 fold, in inflation adjusted terms, since 1820.

Increasing the market for a product/service provides greater than zero sum gains for society. For instance, creating a global market for fine art doesn't make fine art less valuable. It leads to more capital being deployed to the art market, because more people are able to acquire art that they personally appreciate.

Romantacizing the pre-market past, and taking for granted the accumulated gains brought about by non centrally planned, private-sector driven processes, is a mistake.

>>In any case, I wasn't attempting to present a complete analysis of the societal effects of the automobile.

You were definitely implying that the overall impact was negative, and that's what I was responding to.

Re: Gig economy companies spent more than $200M to bankroll Proposition 22

#236

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Do you disagree that a job should mean that someone is able to afford rent and pay your bills? Could we focus down on this question. Ignoring what led to this question being raised, I would like to better capture what is being asked here. Is the idea that any job should be able to provide for any rent and any bills? I think that is an entirely unreasonable interpretation, but I want to make sure we are in agreement…

Reasonable. > Is the idea that any job should be able to provide for any rent and any bills? No. We live a society of free will and choices. It's not reasonable for me to expect that _any_ job will allow me to live _any_ kind of lifestyle. I am firmly in the middle-class. I expect my job will allow me to pay my housing costs, but I don't expect it to pay for a brand new car every year and especially not if I spend al…

>No. We live a society of free will and choices. It's not reasonable for me to expect that _any_ job will allow me to live _any_ kind of lifestyle.

I think reasonable can agree on this. The difficulty is deciding where to draw the line at, now that we have established there exists some line.

>It is reasonable for me to expect that a full-time job should allow me to have a roof over my head, food to eat, etc. I should make a living wage. There are examples of independent organisations that calculate what a living wage is and what constitues a living wage.

But these have certain assumptions built in. A living wage for a single adult with no kids is quite different than a living wage for an adult with 2 kids. So how many kids should be calculated in? Aren't we saying that if a person has greater than what ever number of kids we allow for, aren't we condemning them to being forced to live at an unlivable wage? We could define it to take into account something like number of kids, but then we have now officially begun discriminated on family status and will likely have a number of unintended consequences.

I'm not asking for an answer to this question, but instead a way to justify an answer. A method of proving instead of a specific proof.

Re: Gig economy companies spent more than $200M to bankroll Proposition 22

#237

My husband drives for Uber, and I’m glad the proposition passed as it is. He drives the way Uber was originally envisioned. He goes out some nights if there’s a surge, and in the morning on the way to work he points the app toward our stores and grabs a person (pre-pandemic) or a food delivery (today) on his way in. It pays for gas money, car maintenance, and then some. Some months he makes a few hundred dollars. Som…

> I feel strongly like this law was pushed by people who want Uber to be a full-time job. It’s not. Does the app give him the contact info for each of his passengers after every ride so that he can own the business relationship with them? If not then he's an employee, not an independent contractor. The number of hours worked per month is a complete red herring.

Don't you think Uber giving out peoples contact information like that would be a gross violation of riders privacy? If the driver wants they can ask the rider for their contact info (although I would find that kinda creepy).

Re: Gig economy companies spent more than $200M to bankroll Proposition 22

#239

My husband drives for Uber, and I’m glad the proposition passed as it is. He drives the way Uber was originally envisioned. He goes out some nights if there’s a surge, and in the morning on the way to work he points the app toward our stores and grabs a person (pre-pandemic) or a food delivery (today) on his way in. It pays for gas money, car maintenance, and then some. Some months he makes a few hundred dollars. Som…

> I feel strongly like this law was pushed by people who want Uber to be a full-time job. It’s not. I understand that some people want it to be full-time, but I wish they would stop trying to make Uber something it’s not. And this is the case… why? I could just as easily say “I understand that some people want Uber to be part-time, but I wish they would stop trying to make it something it’s not.”

Well there are tons of companies for people who want full time employment (it's basically the default). It's good for people to have another option.

Re: Gig economy companies spent more than $200M to bankroll Proposition 22

#240

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What is a "social justice minister"?

The kind of Christian minister that cares more about, and talks more about social justice than they do about Christ.

As Jesus said, "it is easier for a camel to pass through the eye of a needle than a poor man enter Heaven."
Post reply on HN