Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

It's not a crime if we do it with an app

pluralistic.net

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

451–460 of 640 posts

Re: It's not a crime if we do it with an app

#451

Post by olalonde »

gmueckl wrote: post #328
wyager wrote: post #282

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The government needs to step in actively to keep a free market from collapsing into one of the natural end states. Which is what, exactly? The US is per capita richer than almost all EU countries by a huge margin (with a few small exceptions mostly enabled by regulatory arbitrage targeting US money), so forgive me if I don't take your seething commentary about the US economic apparatus very seriously.

Any free, unregulated market will eliminate competitors until they create an oligopoly or even a single monopoly. It's an immediate consequence of the rules of the market.

That's simply false. Name one unregulated market where this has occurred.

Re: It's not a crime if we do it with an app

#452

Post by AnthonyMouse »

FireBeyond wrote: post #420
AnthonyMouse wrote: post #389

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> If Uber has let so many drivers on the app such that they cannot earn a minimum wage, they should stop aggressively enrolling new drivers. The number of drivers needed at any given time is completely variable. It's obviously a larger number during peak travel periods. Suppose number of drivers needed off-peak is 100 and the number needed at the peak is 500 and they have 300 drivers. They need to sign up another 200…

> The number of drivers needed at any given time is completely variable. It's obviously a larger number during peak travel periods. That's Uber's business problem to solve, though, not ours. Sucks to be them. The solution isn't "well, let's make it easier for Uber and screw over their not-employees". The government, the people, are not obligated to ensure profitability is possible for every corporations every idea.

> That's Uber's business problem to solve, though, not ours.

The solution is going to be dictated by economics, not magic. There is no option where they convert all of the part-time drivers to full-time without any increase in the demand for rides.

What they're trying to do is avoid cutting off the part-time drivers entirely. But stop trying to force them to do that, it doesn't actually help people.

Re: It's not a crime if we do it with an app

#453

Post by delusional »

hermannj314 wrote: post #32

This is the way our world works. If you steal a potato, you will be arrested immediately and the case will be resolved in a few weeks or months. If you illegally fix the price of potatoes and steal billions from the market, you will be allowed to operate for years in the open while a lengthy civil procedure eventually may ask you to give 1 or 2% of what you stole back in fines. Don't blame the potato theives or potat…

You can not have a lawful and fruitful society if the inhabitants of that society don't want it.

There is no law that you can pass to make the billionaire asshole not be an asshole. You can make him not a billionaire, but the inhabitants of the American society will not allow that.

That is a population problem. Not a political one.

Re: It's not a crime if we do it with an app

#454

Post by radiator »

PaulDavisThe1st wrote: post #395
steveBK123 wrote: post #330

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If Uber has let so many drivers on the app such that they cannot earn a minimum wage, they should stop aggressively enrolling new drivers. They could have also kicked people out for full days, rest of shift, or given an indicator of when they may try again. Something that leaves it more clear they are off and don't linger around to try and get back in. Restaurants/retail will reduce staffing due to demand, but they d…

> If Uber has let so many drivers on the app such that they cannot earn a minimum wage, they should stop aggressively enrolling new drivers. Why? All Uber cares about are the fees it collects, which are dependent on the total number of miles and total number of rides. It has no reason to care if its drivers make minimum wage or not, unless it can be shown that if they cannot, Uber will not have enough drivers. Fortun…

> It has no reason to care if its drivers make minimum wage or not

Is the question "are we breaking any laws" not a reason to care?

Re: It's not a crime if we do it with an app

#455

Post by Nullabillity »

gruez wrote: post #347
steveBK123 wrote: post #330

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If Uber has let so many drivers on the app such that they cannot earn a minimum wage, they should stop aggressively enrolling new drivers. They could have also kicked people out for full days, rest of shift, or given an indicator of when they may try again. Something that leaves it more clear they are off and don't linger around to try and get back in. Restaurants/retail will reduce staffing due to demand, but they d…

>If Uber has let so many drivers on the app such that they cannot earn a minimum wage, they should stop aggressively enrolling new drivers. Most of those drivers were presumably enrolled before that legislation was passed/came into force. Blaming uber for having those drivers seems like a stretch. > They could have also kicked people out for full days, rest of shift, or given an indicator of when they may try again.…

> Blaming uber for having those drivers seems like a stretch.

It seems perfectly predictable that a loophole you actively exploit will be closed off. Don't build your business model around loopholes, or be prepared to face the consequences.

Re: It's not a crime if we do it with an app

#456

Post by waiwai933 »

caseyy wrote: post #83
waiwai933 wrote: post #24

> It's not wage theft if we do it with an app. Which one is this? (Taxi = Uber, Hotel room = Airbnb, Unregistered security = various crypto?)

I think Uber too, and many competitors. They fundamentally employ people but don’t pay minimum wage.

Ah thanks, for some reason the description had made me think there was some dodgy HR/payroll startup rather than the gig economy generally.

Re: It's not a crime if we do it with an app

#457

Post by unethical_ban »

wyager wrote: post #449
unethical_ban wrote: post #393

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The content of the article shows that it is still a problem. You think that landlords and food suppliers colluding to raise prices to just below the breaking point is not a problem?

It's not a "breaking point", it's the market rate. There's no landlord cartel; anyone can easily defect and lower their own prices. The entire food production and provision supply chain has razor-thin margins. If you're hyperfocusing on that industry, it's a sign that your heuristics are pointing you at the wrong things.

Cartel price fixing is not "market rate" by any honest definition.

Re: It's not a crime if we do it with an app

#458

Post by arrosenberg »

dghlsakjg wrote: post #349
arrosenberg wrote: post #314

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Forget about oil for a second. Why is a large box of cereal $8 at the supermarket? It costs pennies to produce, maybe a dollar in landed cost. The small box costs almost the same landed and it's $5, which is also absurd. There is no supply shortage of corn and sugar, and no glut of demand for cereal. I'm not stupid, I understand supply and demand. COVID was 4 years ago. Explain the $8 box of cereal.

What it costs to produce is irrelevant in an equilibrium price for supply and demand. I'm not sure you do understand. Many people are buying the cereal for $8. Its that simple. There is enough demand for it at $8 that the company is happy with the market clearing their supply at that price point. If people were not buying the cereal at that price, they would lower it, or have gone out of business by now. If someone c…

Thanks for quoting the textbook at me. Does that seem like a competitive market to you?

It shouldn't, because if it was, the cost would be pushed down near it's landed cost. That's a result of companies (both CPG producers and food market retailers) having concentrated market share in contravention of the law.

Re: It's not a crime if we do it with an app

#459

Post by greyface- »

miltonlost wrote: post #427
greyface- wrote: post #125

> Inflation is one of the most politically salient factors of this decade > Inflation has lots of causes, it's true. https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/M2SL Algorithmic price fixing is certainly a not-insignificant part of the issue. But it's strange to see zero acknowledgement of the massive increase in money supply over the same time period. When doing causal analysis, we need to examine both the private sector and…

ok, but does the increase in money supply explain the price collusion that businesses admit to doing? You're bringing up an issue that's not pertinent to companies criming.

I'm addressing the part of the article that uses inflation as a framing device. If inflation is the motivating issue, then we are turning a blind eye to the elephant in the room. I don't disagree with the criticisms of price collusion criming.

Re: It's not a crime if we do it with an app

#460

Post by MetaWhirledPeas »

gruez wrote: post #356
DasCorCor wrote: post #242

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They’re colluding to fix prices. That is a cartel. It is facilitated by a middleman app. Still unethical, and should be illegal.

Right, but "companies raise prices more than inflation based cost increases in production would allow for" non-sequitur. There's plenty of ways that prices can raise faster than input costs, that doesn't imply price fixing.

> that doesn't imply price fixing

But Potatorac and Agri Stats do. They are price-fixing right out in the open.

Post reply on HN