I totally get the negative consequences of gig jobs: no benefits, security and so forth. But whenever I take an Uber or Lyft (maybe 100 in the US and UK) I ask the driver how they feel about the job. Almost all of them are happy with it - some gripe about the pay but they like the flexibility. It's possible they aren't thinking far enough ahead - and I'm talking to the self selected group who didn't get a disabling injury or illness and fall into poverty.
California is cracking down on the gig economy
221–230 of 330 posts
Re: California is cracking down on the gig economy
#222I totally get the negative consequences of gig jobs: no benefits, security and so forth. But whenever I take an Uber or Lyft (maybe 100 in the US and UK) I ask the driver how they feel about the job. Almost all of them are happy with it - some gripe about the pay but they like the flexibility. It's possible they aren't thinking far enough ahead - and I'm talking to the self selected group who didn't get a disabling i…
I think people in general want to put up a positive persona up. I think most people (certainly not all) aren’t going to tell strangers how awful their job is, even if they think that.
Re: California is cracking down on the gig economy
#223Earlier quoted context omitted.
Why should I as a taxpayer (mind you I am not American, argument still holds though) subsidise ubers business practices? Because that is exactly what you are arguing for. The article clearly states, that uber is extwrnalising costs, which results in significant losses for the state. Somebody will have to pick up the tap, and your argument seems to be that regular taxpayers should do it.
You are aware that we are all subsidizing the money losing operations of the state all the time? Pretty much anything the state does is assumed to be a money losing proposition. Is it right for the state to externalize its costs on business? If I'm an independent contractor, then it is my responsibility to get insurance, etc. It is my responsibility to make sure I'm taking in enough money to cover that stuff. So, the…
> money losing proposition.
You are defining money losing as not funded by selling goods and services. Most accountants would define it as costs exceeding revenue.
Re: California is cracking down on the gig economy
#224I totally get the negative consequences of gig jobs: no benefits, security and so forth. But whenever I take an Uber or Lyft (maybe 100 in the US and UK) I ask the driver how they feel about the job. Almost all of them are happy with it - some gripe about the pay but they like the flexibility. It's possible they aren't thinking far enough ahead - and I'm talking to the self selected group who didn't get a disabling i…
What is that supposed to mean, "they aren't thinking far enough ahead"? Are you trying to say that since Uber drivers didn't complain about a lack of benefits or lay out their ten year plan for a stranger that it's evidence that they "can't think ahead" and plan to be an Uber driver forever?
Re: California is cracking down on the gig economy
#225Earlier quoted context omitted.
That's not an externality. The person starving to death is the same person who didn't buy insurance. What you're getting at is that there is a reason people buy insurance anyway -- the peace of mind that that won't happen to you, as I mentioned. Because a million dollars in claims money even if you have to multiply it by the only 2% probability of that happening is worth more to you than the $20,000 in guaranteed pre…
It would be a harsh society indeed that didn't protect against some poor choices. You got injured and your insurance lapsed because you forgot to pay it/did not realize you should have it/didn't have the money/got ripped off/made a bad decision/the check was lost in the mail? Starve and die? I've traveled in countries that can be like that and its not a happy place to live. Medieval you might say.
The point you're making is that "starving" is an exaggeration. Which is true -- we have many charities and need-based assistance programs that have nothing to do with employers or insurance, so people don't typically starve in the US and the worst case from not having insurance is actually less bad than the exaggeration of the other poster.
Re: California is cracking down on the gig economy
#226I totally get the negative consequences of gig jobs: no benefits, security and so forth. But whenever I take an Uber or Lyft (maybe 100 in the US and UK) I ask the driver how they feel about the job. Almost all of them are happy with it - some gripe about the pay but they like the flexibility. It's possible they aren't thinking far enough ahead - and I'm talking to the self selected group who didn't get a disabling i…
People don’t want to admit that they have a horrible job in general but I would bet that’s especially true in a context where everything is so dependent on getting a 5 star review. I don’t think they’re all secretly miserable but I would love to see public stats on turnover.
Re: California is cracking down on the gig economy
#227I totally get the negative consequences of gig jobs: no benefits, security and so forth. But whenever I take an Uber or Lyft (maybe 100 in the US and UK) I ask the driver how they feel about the job. Almost all of them are happy with it - some gripe about the pay but they like the flexibility. It's possible they aren't thinking far enough ahead - and I'm talking to the self selected group who didn't get a disabling i…
I think people in general want to put up a positive persona up. I think most people (certainly not all) aren’t going to tell strangers how awful their job is, even if they think that.
I have a couple of friends who have driven for Uber and found it to be a positive experience. It's not very many peoples' dream job, but it's a way to make money with a fairly low barrier to entry for anyone who already has a suitable car. It offers a lot more flexibility than, for example a retail or restaurant job.
Re: California is cracking down on the gig economy
#228> That small status change is huge. These workers would suddenly get labor protections and benefits that all employees get, such as unemployment insurance, health care subsidies, paid parental leave, overtime pay, workers’ compensation, and a guaranteed $12 minimum hourly wage. That’s an pretty optimistic take on the situation. What these new “employees” are going to get, is fired. I know some people are OK with that…
> What these new “employees” are going to get, is fired. If the choice is between raising prices to support higher employee expenditures, and firing all of their drivers and leaving the California market, you think they'll choose the latter? Or is there a third option I'm not thinking of?
Bankruptcy? Uber and Lyft bleed money now, I can't imagine what it would be like if they had to add employee benefit costs on top of that.
Re: California is cracking down on the gig economy
#229Earlier quoted context omitted.
It would be a harsh society indeed that didn't protect against some poor choices. You got injured and your insurance lapsed because you forgot to pay it/did not realize you should have it/didn't have the money/got ripped off/made a bad decision/the check was lost in the mail? Starve and die? I've traveled in countries that can be like that and its not a happy place to live. Medieval you might say.
The point you're making is that "starving" is an exaggeration. Which is true -- we have many charities and need-based assistance programs that have nothing to do with employers or insurance, so people don't typically starve in the US and the worst case from not having insurance is actually less bad than the exaggeration of the other poster.
> people don't typically starve in the US
That doesn't make the cost of feeding people who can't afford food any less of an externality.
Re: California is cracking down on the gig economy
#230I totally get the negative consequences of gig jobs: no benefits, security and so forth. But whenever I take an Uber or Lyft (maybe 100 in the US and UK) I ask the driver how they feel about the job. Almost all of them are happy with it - some gripe about the pay but they like the flexibility. It's possible they aren't thinking far enough ahead - and I'm talking to the self selected group who didn't get a disabling i…
What is that supposed to mean, "they aren't thinking far enough ahead"? Are you trying to say that since Uber drivers didn't complain about a lack of benefits or lay out their ten year plan for a stranger that it's evidence that they "can't think ahead" and plan to be an Uber driver forever?
I'm saying they may not have thought through what they will do in the case of sudden debilitating illness. Most of us don't.