5 ms·

The "drivers can choose" argument is important because it shows that for at least one driver it is genuinely preferable to sleep in his car and work 70 hours a

by strken 10y ago

The "drivers can choose" argument is important because it shows that for at least one driver it is genuinely preferable to sleep in his car and work 70 hours a week than do anything else. Clearly, drivers are facing unemployment, poverty, or working conditions that are even worse. It would be very easy to regulate the hell out of Uber and turn the unicorn into a donkey. However, that wouldn't improve the conditions that those in the economic class of drivers are subject to, it would just make them less visible. Fixing the Uber problem without providing any alternative employment options is a superficial placebo to make the wealthy feel more comfortable, because it doesn't correct any of the underlying economic problems. Those drivers will still exist, they'll just be pushed into agriculture, sweatshops, and dingy housing projects; hidden places, where nobody else has to look at them again. There's a very good article called The Copenhagen Interpretation of Ethics[0] which states that "when you observe or interact with a problem in any way, you can be blamed for it", and "if you interact with a problem and benefit from it, you are a complete monster." This seems to be the case with Uber, where they make money from a social and economic problem where there's an oversupply of unskilled labour, and thus get blamed for the working conditions that were already a reality for so many hidden and unnoticed people, even if they incrementally improve those conditions. This is not a call to give Uber free rein, but rather to consider drivers as more or less rational human beings capable of making their own choices, and to consider driver wellbeing in that light. [0] http://web.archive.org/web/20160806191858/https://blog.jaibot.com/the-copenhagen-interpretation-of-ethics/ http://web.archive.org/web/20160806191858/https://blog.jaibo...

hackuser 10y ago
> It would be very easy to regulate the hell out of Uber and turn the unicorn into a donkey. However, that wouldn't improve the conditions that those in the economic class of drivers are subject to It's a bit of a strawman to use the hyperbole; plenty of industries are regulated, not regulated "the hell out of", and very profitable too. Also, I disagree with the second statement; labor regulations have a long history of helping workers and still do. They enjoy a 40 hour workweek, overtime, safe working conditions, protection for collective bargaining and much more. It's the places where these things are absent, such as Uber and their non-employees, where people suffer more. Of course, anything can be taken too far, but unless workers have real power and leverage, they will be taken advantage of. It may sound like economics, but it's not coincidence that everything the right wing promote strengthens business and/or weakens labor. The economic rationalizations are post-hoc talking points.
- strken 10y ago
  I don't think it's hyperbole. If the reason Uber gets regulated is because it makes the rich feel uncomfortable sitting near poor people, rather than because drivers themselves demand change and back their demands up with industrial action or public outcry, then the created regulations will align with the needs of the rich and not the poor. In particular, you might see artificially strict selection criteria for drivers, preventing the poorest from even having the option of driving for Uber and raising the price of the service such that only the rich can afford it, or you might see the return of the awful medallion systems. Notably, the profiled drivers themselves weren't demanding changes: that was being done by a paid lobbyist from a group that doesn't seem to be affiliated with them. Equally notably, while Uber may be a little exploitative, it's nothing compared to 25 hours a week rostered at random times throughout the week for a hair short of the absolute minimum wage. Taking down Uber while leaving far worse alternatives intact removes an escape hatch for the most exploited workers of all.
  - hackuser 10y ago
    > regulate the hell out of Uber and turn the unicorn into a donkey These are the words used to describe a hypothetical situation of your own creation. It seems hard to escape the term "hyperbole".
    - strken 10y ago
      Turning Uber into a glorified taxi company, compliant with all existing taxi legislation in every jurisdiction worldwide and employing full-time employees with fixed schedules, would either kill it or strip its value so severely as to make it a laughing stock. I have no doubt that heavy-handed regulation could bring such a change. Commenters here and on other submissions seem to complain that such regulation doesn't exist, in particular that Uber doesn't employ full time workers. Maybe I'm missing something. Help me understand what the hyperbolic part is.
      - hackuser 10y ago
        But you just made up that scenario, and its consequences. Also, each post seems to contain more hyperbolic phrases. I think they are obvious enough that I'm not getting into the business of listing them.
maxfurman 10y ago
I'm not sure I agree. My idea of "fixing the Uber problem" is increasing the payout to drivers so they can afford a hotel room at the end of a 14 hour shift. This will directly improve the conditions of Uber drivers, at least.
- EdHominem 10y ago
  If you want to help these drivers I think they'd prefer access to an overnight parking lot and a community-center shower for $10 than a sleezy hotel for $100. If you really came through with the extra pay I think they still sleep in their cars and bank the difference.
- strken 10y ago
  This will do one of three things: 1. increase Uber's already sizable losses, causing the business to fail 2. increase the cost of a fare, leading to fewer rides and forcing drivers to find other employment 3. increase the cost of a fare, but have little impact on rider numbers because fares were already too low, making everyone happy If it's option 3, then that's great. But if that's the case, why did Uber originally lower fares? EDIT: should probably add that I support a UBI to solve this. I'm not suggesting that sleeping in your car after a 14 hour shift is good, or right.
  - hackuser 10y ago
    > increase Uber's already sizable losses, causing the business to fail Or they will need to adjust and find another way, like all businesses do. Or they will fail and someone else will find a better way. That's what the free market is about. It's an old trope that if you increase costs on a business, it's passed along to customers or someone else. That's not how economics works; businesses have many options, they aren't locked into their way of doing things (again, that 'free market'). One question I always have is, why should I care if Uber succeeds or fails? They openly disdain caring about anyone else, including their drivers and the laws of the communities where they operate. I care about their workers, but what does Uber itself matter to me?
  - magicalist 10y ago
anigbrowl 10y ago
consider drivers as more or less rational human beings capable of making their own choices Why? Behavioral economics shows us that many, perhaps most people have huge cognitive biases and make irrational choices. If this wasn't so then scamming people wouldn't be as profitable as it historically has been. To quote PT Barnum 'there's a sucker born every minute'; and while I don't feel like digging up statistics right now, there's tons of evidence that a significant proportion of the population is clueless.
- strken 10y ago
  Right, nobody makes totally optimal decisions all the time, but I wasn't comparing drivers to an inhuman standard of rationality. Perhaps it would be clearer to say that drivers aren't necessarily less rational than anyone else, and that includes the people calling for a limit on hours worked.

by strken 10y ago

hackuser 10y ago

> It would be very easy to regulate the hell out of Uber and turn the unicorn into a donkey. However, that wouldn't improve the conditions that those in the economic class of drivers are subject to It's a bit of a strawman to use the hyperbole; plenty of industries are regulated, not regulated "the hell out of", and very profitable too. Also, I disagree with the second statement; labor regulations have a long history of helping workers and still do. They enjoy a 40 hour workweek, overtime, safe working conditions, protection for collective bargaining and much more. It's the places where these things are absent, such as Uber and their non-employees, where people suffer more. Of course, anything can be taken too far, but unless workers have real power and leverage, they will be taken advantage of. It may sound like economics, but it's not coincidence that everything the right wing promote strengthens business and/or weakens labor. The economic rationalizations are post-hoc talking points.

strken 10y ago
I don't think it's hyperbole. If the reason Uber gets regulated is because it makes the rich feel uncomfortable sitting near poor people, rather than because drivers themselves demand change and back their demands up with industrial action or public outcry, then the created regulations will align with the needs of the rich and not the poor. In particular, you might see artificially strict selection criteria for drivers, preventing the poorest from even having the option of driving for Uber and raising the price of the service such that only the rich can afford it, or you might see the return of the awful medallion systems. Notably, the profiled drivers themselves weren't demanding changes: that was being done by a paid lobbyist from a group that doesn't seem to be affiliated with them. Equally notably, while Uber may be a little exploitative, it's nothing compared to 25 hours a week rostered at random times throughout the week for a hair short of the absolute minimum wage. Taking down Uber while leaving far worse alternatives intact removes an escape hatch for the most exploited workers of all.
- hackuser 10y ago
  > regulate the hell out of Uber and turn the unicorn into a donkey These are the words used to describe a hypothetical situation of your own creation. It seems hard to escape the term "hyperbole".
  - strken 10y ago
    Turning Uber into a glorified taxi company, compliant with all existing taxi legislation in every jurisdiction worldwide and employing full-time employees with fixed schedules, would either kill it or strip its value so severely as to make it a laughing stock. I have no doubt that heavy-handed regulation could bring such a change. Commenters here and on other submissions seem to complain that such regulation doesn't exist, in particular that Uber doesn't employ full time workers. Maybe I'm missing something. Help me understand what the hyperbolic part is.
    - hackuser 10y ago
      But you just made up that scenario, and its consequences. Also, each post seems to contain more hyperbolic phrases. I think they are obvious enough that I'm not getting into the business of listing them.

maxfurman 10y ago

I'm not sure I agree. My idea of "fixing the Uber problem" is increasing the payout to drivers so they can afford a hotel room at the end of a 14 hour shift. This will directly improve the conditions of Uber drivers, at least.

EdHominem 10y ago
If you want to help these drivers I think they'd prefer access to an overnight parking lot and a community-center shower for $10 than a sleezy hotel for $100. If you really came through with the extra pay I think they still sleep in their cars and bank the difference.
strken 10y ago
This will do one of three things: 1. increase Uber's already sizable losses, causing the business to fail 2. increase the cost of a fare, leading to fewer rides and forcing drivers to find other employment 3. increase the cost of a fare, but have little impact on rider numbers because fares were already too low, making everyone happy If it's option 3, then that's great. But if that's the case, why did Uber originally lower fares? EDIT: should probably add that I support a UBI to solve this. I'm not suggesting that sleeping in your car after a 14 hour shift is good, or right.
- hackuser 10y ago
  > increase Uber's already sizable losses, causing the business to fail Or they will need to adjust and find another way, like all businesses do. Or they will fail and someone else will find a better way. That's what the free market is about. It's an old trope that if you increase costs on a business, it's passed along to customers or someone else. That's not how economics works; businesses have many options, they aren't locked into their way of doing things (again, that 'free market'). One question I always have is, why should I care if Uber succeeds or fails? They openly disdain caring about anyone else, including their drivers and the laws of the communities where they operate. I care about their workers, but what does Uber itself matter to me?
- magicalist 10y ago

anigbrowl 10y ago

consider drivers as more or less rational human beings capable of making their own choices Why? Behavioral economics shows us that many, perhaps most people have huge cognitive biases and make irrational choices. If this wasn't so then scamming people wouldn't be as profitable as it historically has been. To quote PT Barnum 'there's a sucker born every minute'; and while I don't feel like digging up statistics right now, there's tons of evidence that a significant proportion of the population is clueless.

strken 10y ago
Right, nobody makes totally optimal decisions all the time, but I wasn't comparing drivers to an inhuman standard of rationality. Perhaps it would be clearer to say that drivers aren't necessarily less rational than anyone else, and that includes the people calling for a limit on hours worked.