IMO, isn't "The Gig Economy" the new term for "Temp Jobs" instead?
'The Gig Economy' Is the New Term for Serfdom
141–150 of 278 posts
Re: 'The Gig Economy' Is the New Term for Serfdom
#142Earlier 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.
But isn't it at least a little bit curious that any and everyone trying to implement it did an equally terrible job?
Re: 'The Gig Economy' Is the New Term for Serfdom
#143Earlier quoted context omitted.
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.
then why are 1 in 7 people food insecure in the US?
And why do 12-14% live under the poverty line? https://poverty.ucdavis.edu/faq/what-current-poverty-rate-un...
There were articles a few years ago where people had to work two or three jobs just to make ends meet - if at all. Nowadays they still do, but the jobs no longer exist and they're being replaced with gigs. At least the jobs had some guarantee of number of hours people could work.
And I mean look at me - I'm already claiming the previous shitty situation of 16 hour work days was better! It really isn't. A 40 hour work week should be possible and enough to live above the poverty line for everyone. Preferably put them comfortably in the middle class.
Re: 'The Gig Economy' Is the New Term for Serfdom
#144IMO, isn't "The Gig Economy" the new term for "Temp Jobs" instead?
In a way, but with even less job guarantees; temp jobs (as far as I remember them from summer jobs) were full days at least, often even full seasons if you wanted it. Gig economy is entirely dependent on demand for e.g. rides, and pay is not based on an hourly rate but on however much competition you have at any given time. Also temp jobs give worker rights, insurances, health and safety regulations, etc; gig economy does not, risks are entirely for the driver.
I mean what does Uber etc do when a driver gets into an accident during a ride? Outside of a ride? If it was a taxi company, insurance would kick in and there'd be no problem. In the gig economy, the risk is entirely for the driver.
Re: 'The Gig Economy' Is the New Term for Serfdom
#145"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.
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.
Re: 'The Gig Economy' Is the New Term for Serfdom
#146If we get a universal basic income set equal to a living wage, then the "gig economy" can go back to being actual gigs, that is, people doing a bit extra to get a bit extra.
I think if we get a universal basic income, all prices will just increase to compensate. I don't believe it'll be possible. It would need to be at or above minimum wage. It would have to be adjusted to location, so someone in SF would make $100K / year off basic income. And that in turn would cause fraud, e.g. registering you're living in SF while living somewhere cheap.
It's some weird Star Trek utopic vision, but I don't see it working. Not at scale. Especially not in the US, because to make it work you need tax money, and the US is tax-averse.
Re: 'The Gig Economy' Is the New Term for Serfdom
#147Earlier quoted context omitted.
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…
Look at history. One day people will have had enough and they're going to go after you and people like you.
That's very possible. The hard question is "then what?"
If you remove the market economy and ability for people to make money, take initiative and be rewarded for it, and go instead to a pure socialist model/goal, that goes so much against so many human instincts, that it will be hard to have people buying into it. As history shows. And it won't remove AI.
What new system do we propose, or how do we modify the current one, in a globalized, AI-powered world?
Re: 'The Gig Economy' Is the New Term for Serfdom
#148If we get a universal basic income set equal to a living wage, then the "gig economy" can go back to being actual gigs, that is, people doing a bit extra to get a bit extra.
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).
Re: 'The Gig Economy' Is the New Term for Serfdom
#149Most 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 min…
Taxis are going to be replaced by robots within the lifetimes of most people reading this. I think it's been clear for a while that owning a large segment of that market is Uber's end game. Under the classic hacker ethic, this is a good thing; humans shouldn't be forced to perform menial tasks. Of course, people currently performing those tasks for a living might not appreciate that. In the long term, however I think…
We'll die from starvation and exposure because we can't afford a home anymore, but at least we reduced traffic deaths and generated a lot of money for our shareholders in the process ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
Re: 'The Gig Economy' Is the New Term for Serfdom
#150Earlier quoted context omitted.
If that's true shouldn't we try to create an economy that doesn't actively reward those behaviors?
That's harder than just shifting the economic system. The problem is that human beings (or at least a lot of them) willingly and almost instinctively follow psychopaths and narcissists. As long as that's the case then these behaviors will be rewarded in any and all economic systems. The rules for how money moves around do not change human psychology.
You don't think the constant drive for profit encourages people to indulge their worst qualities? I'm not saying that people can't be naturally selfish and narcissistic, but people can also naturally be kind, generous, and compassionate. If there was an economic system that didn't put profit above all else I think you would see more of the latter qualities.