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

'The Gig Economy' Is the New Term for Serfdom

truthdig.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 278 posts

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

#51

Post by lr4444lr »

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…

I agree with you about the dysfunction of the medallion system, but it reveals a bigger problem with the article.

The medallion is meant to artificially constrain supply. NYCTLC tried and failed to block Uber in order to protect their value, i.e., enforce a closed shop, and this was what the cabbie was upset about - losing his exclusionary license to do business. His complaint could hardly be more ANTI "gig-economy" against Uber's drivers flooding the market, which is what tanked his asset's value.

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

#52

Post by wooter »

taneq wrote: post #32
carlmr wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, the medallions were stupid, although I think they shouldn't have allowed Uber to operate without medallions, or get rid of the system in general. >Relying on their "value" for retirement is crazy. And like another commenter has said - if it was worth 1.1 million, why not sell it and retire Because he took out a loan of 1.1 million to buy it. It's not that he bought it for next to nothing and it rose to that pric…

Exactly, and that's my problem with ride sharing companies like Uber (or rather, with governments letting them operate as unlicenced taxis despite strict regulation of 'real' taxis). The government created an artificial monopoly, sold tickets to operate in that monopoly, and then failed to protect it. Medallions were a stupid idea but that doesn't mean the government should be able to just write them off and screw ov…

So it should be able to screw people not holding them? Or those who cant get a $1 Million dollar loan or pay 3k to drive a car? Car leases are easy at $150.

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

#54

Post by kdamken »

maxxxxx wrote: post #30
WhompingWindows wrote: post #6

Serfdom is not a good comparison. Serfs were essentially slaves required to work the land, they did not choose to do so at hours that suited them, which is a key "feature" of the gig economy. They also were required to work mines, logging, or whatever service the lord of the manor wished. Let's say you worked for ride-shaes the same hours as a serf, something like sunrise to sunset. If you drove an Uber in my city fo…

Do you realize how obnoxiously condescending the line "look how good you have it over the people a few hundred years ago" is? How about we give that line to people who already have a lot but always want more? No, it's only used against the little guy who dares to want a decent life.

Yeah, so maybe then the writer of the article shouldn't have used that as the title for it.

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

#56

Post by GVIrish »

iliketosleep wrote: post #41

The underlying issue is that these VC backed companies break the law to gain a business advantage and face no real consequences, especially if they are successful. But if individuals and small companies attempt to break these very same laws they get crushed. It's almost as though if you've been to Stanford and are backed by well-connected VC's, you're able to recklessly break the law in the name of "disruptive" techn…

What has effectively happened is that VC-backed startups have discovered a weakness in the US legal system. Basically, if you have enough funding and gain enough traction, you can ignore the law with little consequence. There may be pushback eventually but once the startup is big enough they can implore customers to fight the law on their behalf.

Established big businesses flout the law in service of profit too, but often they're using lobbyists to get the law bent to their benefit.

Whoever has the gold makes the rules as it were.

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

#57

Post by lr4444lr »

refurb wrote: post #14
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…

To be honest, I actually feel bad for medallion owners, even if the medallion system is a bad one. The gov't sets ups a system, tells you the rules and says "if you buy an expensive medallion, you can drive a cab and make a living". The value of the medallion is purely based on the gov't promise to maintain the system. So you buy one (or many) and a few years later someone does a work around and the gov't says "oh we…

There are reportedly about 14,000 medallions. At $1,000,000 a pop, it would not be too terrible to have a one-time buyout paid over several years as a compromise to ending the system.

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

#58

Post by huffmsa »

eeZah7Ux wrote: post #46
huffmsa wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, it's purely based on artificial scarcity. Which historical never lasts. PanAm went bust because they banked on price fixed airline tickets. USPS benefited from national mail logistics only being available to government level endeavors. DeBeers is about to get crushed by artificial diamonds which are both cheaper and "better diamonds" than the massive stockpile they've accumulated. The rocket industry has long la…

> it's purely based on artificial scarcity. Which historical never lasts. Never? Money are based on artificial scarcity as well.

Heard of the blockchain recently?

Money used to be backed by naturally scarce resources. An ounce of gold is an ounce is an immutable portion of some finite limit of gold until we get alchemy rolling.

But yes, fiat currencies based on the promise of government protection are very susceptible to being popped.

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

#59

Post by rch »

refurb wrote: post #14
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…

To be honest, I actually feel bad for medallion owners, even if the medallion system is a bad one. The gov't sets ups a system, tells you the rules and says "if you buy an expensive medallion, you can drive a cab and make a living". The value of the medallion is purely based on the gov't promise to maintain the system. So you buy one (or many) and a few years later someone does a work around and the gov't says "oh we…

It's the same with mineral rights in proximity to residential housing. The system needs to adapt over time, and it is reasonable to expect people to accommodate changes as they become necessary.

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

#60

Post by eganist »

WhompingWindows wrote: post #6

Serfdom is not a good comparison. Serfs were essentially slaves required to work the land, they did not choose to do so at hours that suited them, which is a key "feature" of the gig economy. They also were required to work mines, logging, or whatever service the lord of the manor wished. Let's say you worked for ride-shaes the same hours as a serf, something like sunrise to sunset. If you drove an Uber in my city fo…

> they did not choose to do so at hours that suited them

Aside from being particularly banal, the assertion that employees partaking in a gig economy can reasonably choose their own hours is provably false. People relying on gigs to make a living are effectively obligated to follow demand; choosing your own hours is only an option when the revenue is no longer necessary for sustenance.

Don't take my word for it -- this stuff is all actively being litigated, regulated, and decided, and generally not favorably for Uber:

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/world/2017/11/10/british...

https://www.swissinfo.ch/eng/wage-dumping-_swiss-authorities...

https://www.bna.com/massachusetts-uber-drivers-n57982089498/

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/business/news/uber-driver...

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/business/news/uber-suprem...

etc.

Post reply on HN