'The Gig Economy' Is the New Term for Serfdom • Hacker News Board

Re: 'The Gig Economy' Is the New Term for Serfdom

#271

Post by MrFantastic » Wed, Mar 28, 2018, 9:19 PM UTC

zip1234 wrote: post #100

fergie wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There are many good reasons to licence taxi(driver)s, and cap their number. For example: - to keep traffic down - to ensure a minimum standard of vehicle - to ensure safe, well-trained and responsible taxi drivers. - to ensure a fair level of income - etc. However the main problem with the medallion system is that they can be traded, speculated on, and used to extract "rent" from workers further down the chain. This…

I agree that those are reasons for the INTENT behind regulating/licensing taxis. Certainly in the past those things may have been more important. However, with the improved access to information that people now have through their phones it seems a lot less necessary. - to keep traffic down I don't know if limiting taxis actually ends up limiting cars, but limiting cars is certainly the definition of keeping traffic d…

In big cities, parking the cars is the major problem. Parking spaces cost $1500+/mo

Re: 'The Gig Economy' Is the New Term for Serfdom

#272

Post by MrFantastic » Wed, Mar 28, 2018, 9:19 PM UTC

adrianN wrote: post #15

gambiting wrote: post #3

I was mostly agreeing with the article until this part: "His medallion, once worth $1.1 million, had plummeted in value to $180,000. The dramatic drop in the value of the medallion, which he had hoped to lease for $3,000 a month or sell to finance his retirement, wiped out his economic security. He faced financial ruin and poverty. And he was not alone." The medalions are stupid and shouldn't exist. Relying on their…

If you have a single asset worth a million dollars and you hope renting it out for 3% of its a value per year, you should immediately sell it and buy a well diversified investment portfolio instead. You can still sell 3% of your portfolio every year.

They were buying medallions on leverage with hopes of appreciation.

Re: 'The Gig Economy' Is the New Term for Serfdom

#273

Post by troupe » Wed, Mar 28, 2018, 11:22 PM UTC

eganist wrote: post #267

troupe wrote: post #234

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> the assertion that employees partaking in a gig economy can reasonably choose their own hours is provably false Having talked with a number of Uber drivers, I know that many of them like Uber specifically because they can choose their own hours. Of all the things they have told me they DON'T like, choosing their own hours is the one thing they all DO say that they like. Some take off when their kid has a baseball g…

That's all well and good, but policymaking doesn't hinge on anecdotes. Surge wouldn't be a thing if Uber really subscribed to the idea of letting drivers choose their own hours. As an aside: your example is in theory no different than what unlimited leave allows you to do, but we know how broken that system is in the bay.

You claimed that you could prove that drivers couldn't choose their own hours. I didn't see anything in your links that indicated this was the case. Please point me to it if it exists.

The only data point I have is a sample of about 200 drivers in the US. I have not heard a single one say that they can't choose their own hours and everyone that has said anything about choosing their hours has said they like their ability to choose when they work. (One did say that he has to be careful not to be lazy since he can decide if he goes to work that day or not.)

Re: 'The Gig Economy' Is the New Term for Serfdom

#274

Post by Broken_Hippo » Thu, Mar 29, 2018, 11:21 AM UTC

ric2b wrote: post #223

Broken_Hippo wrote: post #207

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This isn't so much about competition. It is about unfair competition. One side has rules and regulations they need to abide by. Many are simply there to make things fair (like meters). Some are safety (not mentioned, but requiring a different class of drivers license). Some are things that obviously should be changed (car models, for example, or the medallion system). Some things are probably a mixture of safety and…

> Not everyone gains by having lower fares if you need to get to work during a busy hour, as mentioned in the article. Surge pricing and weird pricing schemes makes it difficult to plan when money is tight. Surge pricing makes sense. It encourages people to choose different hours to travel and drivers to drive more during those times, which in the long run can lead to a much better experience for most users as it ens…

That's all fine and good if you have a choice in when you travel. Car broken down and you need to get to work? Good luck having a choice. Doctor's appointment? Need to go to court? You are just stuck having to pay.

You can plan on having more cabs during busy hours and fewer during less busy hours. Buses often have more busses on the routes during busy times of day. Not everywhere has these choices, though. Outside of larger cities, Uber or Lyft might be the closest you have to public transportation.

If you want choice in such things, it takes more than surge pricing. Cooperation between workplaces and so on to stagger start/end times, for example.

Re: 'The Gig Economy' Is the New Term for Serfdom

#275

Post by douglaswlance » Fri, Mar 30, 2018, 9:03 PM UTC

maxxxxx wrote: post #120

douglaswlance wrote: post #28

It's never been easier to start a business. We need more CEOs and business owners, not more serfs. Lack of wage growth incentivizes people to find new, more value-producing work. Subsidizing low-income work is self-destructive.

We can't all be CEOs. To run a business you need people who work for you. Both employees and employers play an important role in the economy and both should be treated with respect. Lack of wage growth also limits business creation. Most of us need some kind of reserve to start something. You can't start from absolutely zero while struggling to survive.

I did it. You can too.

We can all be solo business owners.

Re: 'The Gig Economy' Is the New Term for Serfdom

#276

Post by dang » Sat, Mar 31, 2018, 10:24 PM UTC

nathanasmith wrote: post #176

JulianMorrison wrote: post #107

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A living wage can be defined as: enough money in the particular location to rent an apartment suitable for human habitation, pay all necessary bills for heating, water, power, phone etc, eat nutritious if simple food, drink safe water, buy cheap but functional clothes and ordinary groceries, commute to work, and have a little over for leisure. If your locality is barbaric enough to charge money or require insurance f…

>If your locality is barbaric enough to charge money or require insurance for healthcare, that is included too. Eff you, condescending prick. A lecture about "barbarism" from the continent that fought the two most devastating wars of the 20th century and drug the rest of the world into your squabble. spit

Please don't reply to a bad comment with a worse one. Personal attacks, in particular, will get you banned here, and ideological or national rants are not much better.

Edit: Dismayingly, it looks like you've been making a habit of this. Would you please (re-)read https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html and take the spirit of this site to heart when commenting from now on?

Re: 'The Gig Economy' Is the New Term for Serfdom

#277

Post by fruitzome » Sun, Apr 01, 2018, 3:36 PM UTC

meowfly wrote: post #260

fruitzome wrote: post #258

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Perhaps tax law could penalize part-time work while rewarding full-timers? Translation: steal more aggressively from people choosing to work less, than we steal from full time wage slaves. I love my gigs and the freedom of doing freelance web, software, uber driving and also small sales. I only work 20-30 hours per week as I see fit and can choose who I report to and when I take time off. Why should the government s…

Taxes are not theft. They aren't even remotely close to theft. Steal is the wrong verb here. I'd agree that income taxes aren't great ways for the government to raise revenue but calling it "stealing" is a dishonest portrayal of the relationship we have with our government. I do agree though that a tax system that punishes people who for working less hours is essentially a regressive tax and thus a poor idea.

You are mistaken.

The history of taxation is one of tolls, robbery, piracy and skullduggery. Source: https://mises.org/library/taxation-robbery

The word I should have used is Robbery. Not theft.

Readthe founding father's of US constitution for their thoughts on this kind of income tax.

In fact, Income Tax was promised to be temporary to fund war efforts. Liars.

Any compulsory demand to give up your labor and property at the threat of being locked in a cage, or killed is straight up robbery.

Also, your comment is Statist because we do not have a relationship to the "government". We have a relationship to the men with guns that show up at your door when you do not compulsorily give up 40% of your labor and property.

Re: 'The Gig Economy' Is the New Term for Serfdom

#278

Post by ric2b » Mon, Apr 02, 2018, 10:39 AM UTC

Broken_Hippo wrote: post #274

ric2b wrote: post #223

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Not everyone gains by having lower fares if you need to get to work during a busy hour, as mentioned in the article. Surge pricing and weird pricing schemes makes it difficult to plan when money is tight. Surge pricing makes sense. It encourages people to choose different hours to travel and drivers to drive more during those times, which in the long run can lead to a much better experience for most users as it ens…

That's all fine and good if you have a choice in when you travel. Car broken down and you need to get to work? Good luck having a choice. Doctor's appointment? Need to go to court? You are just stuck having to pay. You can plan on having more cabs during busy hours and fewer during less busy hours. Buses often have more busses on the routes during busy times of day. Not everywhere has these choices, though. Outside o…

> That's all fine and good if you have a choice in when you travel. Car broken down and you need to get to work? Good luck having a choice. Doctor's appointment? Need to go to court? You are just stuck having to pay.

But this is exactly the problem that surge pricing solves, other people that can choose when to travel will already be traveling at other times, which means you'll have a car available instead of having 0 because everyone else is trying to travel at the same time.

Making the price constant doesn't guarantee that you'll be able to travel when you need, only that if you can get a car, you'll pay a certain price. If you want both that seems like something that is solved by both surge pricing and insurance.

> You can plan on having more cabs during busy hours and fewer during less busy hours. Buses often have more busses on the routes during busy times of day.

That means higher infrastructure costs (need more cars, more maintenance, more/bigger roads) which will lead to higher prices.

> If you want choice in such things, it takes more than surge pricing. Cooperation between workplaces and so on to stagger start/end times, for example.

Yes, but surge pricing can nudge that cooperation into existence. Maybe not by itself, but in conjunction with surge pricing in other areas as well.

Our societies have to deal with extra costs because of the man-made rush-hour: "Everyone" showers at the same time, turns on their toasters at the same time, occupies the roads/buses at the same time, etc. Turn those costs into real dollars instead of subsidizing them with higher prices on the low hours and watch businesses start to fix it by themselves.