15 ms·

It did reshape it. Turns out you can offload your costs to your 'employees' that hardly will organize and project costs and earnings to the future (like a compe

by lalos 8y ago

It did reshape it. Turns out you can offload your costs to your 'employees' that hardly will organize and project costs and earnings to the future (like a competent business). I've talked with bunch of car sharing drivers who were bamboozled with car loans, get hit by traffic infractions, costs of maintenance and the list goes on and on. I feel that the gig economy preys on people who have not developed that risk management and are lured by the promise of easy money (make $500 this weekend). That can be verified by reading on what kind of game theory the big companies investing in (how to sweeten a deal, making people decide on the spot yes or no, etc). It's an interesting state, but I hope they turn it around. There is potential.

taurath 8y ago
That’s what we have done for teachers for decades.
nerdponx 8y ago
Interesting that this thread and the "chatbots aren't so great after all" thread hit the front page on the same day. Anyone who actually thought people gave a shit about chatbots was either deluded, a chatbot API salesman, or a manager/owner trying to cut costs by downsizing their call/chat support center. Anyone who actually thought the gig economy was helping anyone but business owners was either deluded or a shill.
- cfadvan 8y ago
  The problem is that “deluded” and “personally invested in” form a venom diagram that looks a lot like a big circle, especially on business and tech sites.
  - nkantar 8y ago
    > "venom diagram" Fantastic typo! (Or was it intentional?)
    - cfadvan 8y ago
      Total typo, or rather autocorrect-o, but I’m running with it now!
  - SimonPStevens 8y ago
    Don't know if it's just a typo or an actual malapropism, but it's called a Venn diagram.
  - CNJ7654 8y ago
    brb stealing the term "venom diagram" for future use
- lalos 8y ago
  We need to take time to think things through, use critical thinking, decide for yourself, see behind the motivations and incentives. Never drink the kool-aid, but you can taste it and decide for yourself. Consider all stakeholders (not only investors and owners) and the impact on society. Us in tech are the ones that are implementing the vision, we are responsible too. Would not go to extremes and say everybody is a shill, since there has been serious innovation but we should be transparent of what is the cost of all that innovation. Just be honest with oneself (e.g. I'm working with this new fancy decentralized database instead of just buzzwording your way to success by blockchaining everything, etc). We need to drop the ego and work on what we love.
- unimpressive 8y ago
  This seems like an overly reactionary take. There's a lot of noise in any given hype cycle, distinguishing between unusual preferences people happen to have and manufactured interest isn't always easy. (See: The curious curious phenomena that humans put most of their personal information on the Internet where other people can see it.)
- sotojuan 8y ago
  Or they did the Fiverr ads for the NYC subways. There’s one that makes fun of people with white collar careers by calling them “chained down” and declaring that working for Fiverr in the gig economy is better.
  - tmpz22 8y ago
    Saw this on the of a bus in SF and started laughing. Low pay contractor work is the way to get unchained in SF? You won't even be able to make rent unless you're in the top percentile.
    - robotbikes 8y ago
      I saw someone on fiverr offering to install Java on Ububtu Linux starting at 100$. That sounds about right. For the most part these sort of race to the bottom gigs would only work if your cost of living were really low relative to the $ amount. I did Amazon Turk work mainly out of curiosity/boredom, at one point I transcribed a conference call for some UK non-profit. I think it paid like 3-4$ and took me a few hours. I couldn't imagine actually living on that but I'm sure Amazon made some profit.
      - gowld 8y ago
        Who is someone who needs Java on Linux, but can't find the download button on Oracle's website, but can figure out how navigate the fiverr app/site?
  - xkcd-sucks 8y ago
    "chained down" -> "securely anchored"
  - elvirs 8y ago
    out of all 'on demand' companies Fiverr should keep its mouth shut. The quality of work there is pure garbage
  - gowld 8y ago
    Fiverr ads try to glamorize taking a job where you can't afford to eat or sleep. https://www.newyorker.com/culture/jia-tolentino/the-gig-economy-celebrates-working-yourself-to-death https://www.newyorker.com/culture/jia-tolentino/the-gig-econ... I'm half expecting their business model is to tarnish the industry to badly that Uber et all pay them hush money to stop advertising.
- briandear 8y ago
  It helps the business owner and the consumer. Let’s not forget the consumer here. It also helps those willing to engage in gig activities. If Uber wasn’t marginally beneficial to drivers, why do they do it? Acting like Uber drivers are all idiots and need “protecting” is idiotic. If the economics don’t work, they quit.
  - deleted 8y ago
    [deleted]
  - gowld 8y ago
    You can't just quit a car loan. Switching costs. "Marginal benefit" isn't a win overall if it's combined with excessive fixed costs over overhead. This is basic Econ 101/102 stuff. If you fall in a hole, you get marginal benefits from trying to climb out. That doesn't make the hole good for you.
  - gaius 8y ago
    If Uber wasn’t marginally beneficial to drivers, why do they do it? If HFCS wasn’t healthy, why do people eat it?
    - drdeca 8y ago
      Healthy and marginally beneficial aren't really synonymous. People value things other than just their health. Now, that isn't to say that it wouldn't be better if people consumed less HFCS. (But, isn't the ubiquity of HFCS partially due to corn subsidies? I think I heard that.) So, uh, when people purchase foods with HFCF I think it makes sense that this aligns with their marginal preferences. Does this mean it is to thei benefit? Hmm.
  - rectang 8y ago
    It's a negotiation with severe information asymmetry. The business does hiring many times, so they reap the efficiencies of scale and get increasingly adept over time at hiding the risks they offload onto the contractors. To balance the information asymmetry, the contractors would need to pool their efforts similarly, and improve their ability to discover the true compensation. In other words, collective bargaining, with specialists who understand the full terms of the contract including all that's hidden in the fine print. <snark cantresist="true">All those government officials who pass laws crippling unions should stop treating business owners like idiots who need "protecting".</snark> Increasing unionizion has many side effects on the wider economy, and it's not my purpose to flog them. Instead, I'm merely trying to illustrate that each individual contractor is at a significant disadvantage when negotiating.
- kbenson 8y ago
  > Anyone who actually thought people gave a shit about chatbots was either deluded People don't need to give a shit about chatbots. A large amount of people deal with them all the time. Every time you decide to use chat to get help from some site that provides s service for you, what do you think the odds are you're first connected to a human? By having chatbots do the initial contact and information gathering, you can streamline the actual process and seamlessly connect and hand off to a real support rep after the rote info gathering is done, and provide them with the account number, a generalized idea of what the problem is, etc. Some requests can probably be handled entirely by the bot (need to change your password? That's easy to script). Chatbots are all around us, supplementing formal interactions.
  - megaman22 8y ago
    Except everyone just spams 0 or "Representative" until they hit a real person, so the actual effect of the chatbot is a lot of money and hype wasted, and irritation on the end-user side.
  - pilsetnieks 8y ago
    But that's not all it purported to be - sort of like a more intelligent IVR for customer support. Instead chatbots were promised to replace or supplement many online interactions, most notably shopping. But I guess people still go to Amazon in their browser or app, instead of trying to interact with a robot (Facebook Messenger? Whatsapp? Slack?)
  - joe_the_user 8y ago
    Chatbot and phone robots are all around, gathering information, forwarding you to humans, who promptly ask you all the information again since they can't rely on the chatbots.
- throwaway37585 8y ago
  > helping anyone but business owners So you’re saying customers use those services for literally no reason.
  - deleted 8y ago
    [deleted]
- conanbatt 8y ago
  > Anyone who actually thought the gig economy was helping anyone but business owners Consumers were losers?
  - gleenn 8y ago
    Good riddance to the poorly upkept taxis with the aggressive drivers, and expensive rides. I feel like the drivers are not paid adequately though, esp. given the hidden expenses. I talk with them regularly and think many don't realize those costs. I always tip as a result, and I think Uber/Lyft give me better drivers as a result, though I can't be sure.
    - conanbatt 8y ago
      > I feel like the drivers are not paid adequately though, esp. given the hidden expenses. I talk with them regularly and think many don't realize those costs. I think that these kind of thoughts are simply not economics. If driving is bad money after all of that, eventually people will realize and it will all come crumbling down. But it cant be true if drivers keep working for years like this. It is also a stance that you can take only because you think there is something the government should do about it. There a a lot of carrers that are not financially sensical by some interpretation. Should artsists be banned or licensed to limit the number? Should Actors? Should QA analysts? etc etc. My point is that even if it is a bad deal for drivers, its their choice to make, and its not going to lead to a better outcome to make the choice for them.
  - nerdponx 8y ago
    This is a good point. I was probably a little hyperbolic in my post. The existence of Uber has done a tremendous amount good in breaking up entrenced taxi industries, bringing service to some seriously under-served areas.
- jlarocco 8y ago
  > Anyone who actually thought the gig economy was helping anyone but business owners was either deluded or a shill. It's more accurate to say business owners and consumers are benefiting at the expense of the employees.
  - knuththetruth 8y ago
    The idea that “consumers” are a separate class from employees is specious. There’s only labor and Capital owners, with the latter doing a wonderful job of turning the former against themselves.
    - drdeca 8y ago
      Perhaps people can benefit from something in their capacity as a consumer while it being a downside in their capacity as an employee, and then on net as a person either benefit from or experience a detriment from the change, depending on which of the two was larger? Like, suppose someone is selling some good and they get paid on commission, as like, some proportion of the purchase cost. If the price of goods of that sort go down (maybe one of the materials needed to manufacture it became more abundant?), then they would receive less income, but also not have to pay as much for different similar goods, and whether they are overall better or worse off would depend on the details.
    - andrewflnr 8y ago
      The roles of consumer, employee and employer are relative with respect to industry. The same person could occupy all three roles in different parts of their life (e.g small business owner who outsources, does GrubHub deliveries when business is slow, and uses Uber when they go out drinking. I'm not saying labor vs capital isn't also a useful perspective, but to say it's the only one ignores the complexity of reality.
    - jlarocco 8y ago
      Well clearly a consumer in one context is usually an employee (or capital owner) in another. In this particular case the consumers who are benefiting are generally a different group than the employees who are losing out, so I don't see why you bothered to point this out.
- smallgovt 8y ago
  >> Anyone who actually thought the gig economy was helping anyone but business owners was either deluded or a shill. That's quite a generalization you're making. Just because business owners are benefiting by pushing wages as low as the market will bear and reaping profits/growth, doesn't mean consumers/drivers aren't benefiting from the arrangement as well. Service providers are granted an additional at-will income opportunity. Consumers are granted a high-value low-cost service. Many will argue that the service providers are being tricked into the arrangement through hidden costs. However, a large sector of drivers actually rent their cars, which pretty much removes all hidden costs and proves to me that these gigs are a viable alternative to employment.
  - s73v3r_ 8y ago
    "Many will argue that the service providers are being tricked into the arrangement through hidden costs. However, a large sector of drivers actually rent their cars, which pretty much removes all hidden costs and proves to me that these gigs are a viable alternative to employment." I'm going to highly disagree with you, there. I had a friend who tried renting the car from one of those companies. Nothing could be further from the truth than what you posted. It was basically the old "company store".
  - collyw 8y ago
    I think its easy to be fooled. I am a Software Developer with a decent salary for where I live. I got offered a job a couple of years ago, where 3/4 of my wage was through an international company and the rest through a normal Spanish one. When I saw the amount going into my account every month, I thought I had hit the jackpot as it was way more than I expected. A while later when I got converted to a full Spanish contract, and my manager advised me to make sure I wasn't getting screwed. It was only then that I realized I hadn't actually been getting the pension payments on the 3/4 of my international contract up until then. What looked like a good deal hadn't actually been one at all. I would be surprised if people less educated than me would understand all the hidden costs.
- reaperducer 8y ago
  >Anyone who actually thought the gig economy was helping anyone but business owners was either deluded or a shill. Sometimes you just need a quick gig to make ends meet between jobs. Something you can pick up in a day or two and leave just as quickly. Full-time, long-term? No, it's not a great idea. But it's a good safety net when things get tough.
  - nerdponx 8y ago
    How about an actual social safety net though?
    - mmirate 8y ago
      Those systems have a nasty habit of running out of other people's money.
      - ComradeTaco 8y ago
        Seem to work pretty okay in the rest of the developed world.
        reaperducer 8y ago
        You'll have to be more specific about "okay" and "developed world." A lot of Americans point to Canada as an example, but it's a pretty bad example. If healthcare was so great in Canada, then there wouldn't be private hospitals in the United States that cater only to Canadians who go to America for the healthcare they can't get in Canada, or can't get in a timely fashion. In American towns where a lot of Canadians spend the winter, the radio stations are full of ads for these hospitals. (Palm Springs, for example.) If you mean the UK, the news over there is constantly full of horror stories about its NHS. Perhaps you can be more specific?
        nerdponx 8y ago
        Nationalized healthcare is one very extreme implementation of a specific subset of a social safety net.
- exolymph 8y ago
  It's more complex than that: https://www.inc.com/sonya-mann/gig-economy-worker-conditions.html https://www.inc.com/sonya-mann/gig-economy-worker-conditions...
xapata 8y ago
I used to drive pizza delivery. That promise of quick cash for driving has been around for a long time.
- draw_down 8y ago
  But pizza companies don’t care what kind of beater you drive the pizza in, as long as you tell them you have insurance.
kbenson 8y ago
> I've talked with bunch of car sharing drivers who were bamboozled with car loans, get hit by traffic infractions, costs of maintenance and the list goes on and on. I've seen a lot of the people that some cases of people that do it that are future minded and care about running the numbers just rent a car for the day. All of a sudden, you've abstracted away a lot of those variable costs to a third party. Unfortunately, I think the rental companies wised up after a while, and have wording in the contracts about ride-sharing now. I imagine in a large enough metro area, someone could (or has) abstract the vehicle and maintenance portion of the larger taxi services to specialized rental service for people that work in ride-sharing. Rent a ride-share car for a day, or more likely by the hour, and they'll make sure it's clean and in good running condition and meets the requirements for ride sharing service X, Y or Z. Specialized ride-sharing insurance optional... Actually, I imagine some of the existing taxi services in larger cities might have already shifted to this. Seems like a natural pivot, since they already have the majority of what's needed in place.
- deleted 8y ago
  [deleted]
- mentat 8y ago
  Rental car companies as the new taxi fleet companies would be an interesting turn. They're probably missing an opportunity here.
- RandallBrown 8y ago
  Uber has partnered with several rental companies specifically to rent out cars for ride sharing. https://www.uber.com/drive/vehicle-solutions/ https://www.uber.com/drive/vehicle-solutions/
- joncrane 8y ago
  This fleet maintenance outfit would be a perfect candidate to pivot to driverless car sharing when the technology becomes available.
the_cat_kittles 8y ago
bring back unions
- briandear 8y ago
  Are individuals incapable of making decisions on their own? Why shouldn’t the individual have the choice to drive or not drive as well as making decisions about their economic situation? Nobody is forced to drive. Nobody is forced to work for less than they value their labor. Unionizing Uber means dramatically high prices, which means less demand. There isn’t a magic pot of money just waiting to be distributed. If comes from consumer pockets. If Uber gets more expensive, I’ll drive myself. So that guy that would have made $10, now makes zero because he thinks he deserves $20. So he is actually worse off now. Markets don’t work in a vacuum — there are substitutes and you can’t “fix” a problem without unintended consequences. Let supply and demand work. Those that think they should earn more can quit and to sell their services to someone willing to pay their desired rates. If nobody will pay that desired rate, then it’s clear that the market doesn’t value that service that much. Why is supply and demand so hard for people to understand? We oppose industrial monopolies, why would we advocate for labor monopolies via unions?
  - Thlom 8y ago
    Who said anything about monopolies? I though a union was just workers banding together and using their strength in number to negotiate better working conditions, better pay and so on? It's easy for someone with a sought after talent to say normal workers can just "quit and sell their services to someone willing to pay more", but that isn't an actual option for many many people.
  - trophycase 8y ago
    Unions solve the coordination problem and nullify the leverage a corporation has over workers. This leverage imbalance creates imperfect markets, it doesn't facilitate it. People need to eat, they need to take time to find a new job, they need to build skills. High prices of medicine is a great example: They can get away with charging so much simply because there is an imbalance between how much you need them versus how much they need you.
agumonkey 8y ago
let's hope it will create a separate organ to let people work at lower pressure and yet not push up cost of service back to the old ways
kevin_b_er 8y ago
The gig enconomy's innovation was offloading risk entirely onto the "employees" who aren't employees, but "independent contractors" with no rights or recourse. This is a wealth consolidation practice yet again. The gig runners make money off the independent contractors because they take all the risk.
oculusthrift 8y ago
and what would these same people do instead? you’re pretending there’s some much better job out there waiting from the uber is preventing them from taking

by lalos 8y ago

taurath 8y ago

That’s what we have done for teachers for decades.

nerdponx 8y ago

Interesting that this thread and the "chatbots aren't so great after all" thread hit the front page on the same day. Anyone who actually thought people gave a shit about chatbots was either deluded, a chatbot API salesman, or a manager/owner trying to cut costs by downsizing their call/chat support center. Anyone who actually thought the gig economy was helping anyone but business owners was either deluded or a shill.

cfadvan 8y ago
The problem is that “deluded” and “personally invested in” form a venom diagram that looks a lot like a big circle, especially on business and tech sites.
- nkantar 8y ago
  > "venom diagram" Fantastic typo! (Or was it intentional?)
  - cfadvan 8y ago
    Total typo, or rather autocorrect-o, but I’m running with it now!
- SimonPStevens 8y ago
  Don't know if it's just a typo or an actual malapropism, but it's called a Venn diagram.
- CNJ7654 8y ago
  brb stealing the term "venom diagram" for future use
lalos 8y ago
We need to take time to think things through, use critical thinking, decide for yourself, see behind the motivations and incentives. Never drink the kool-aid, but you can taste it and decide for yourself. Consider all stakeholders (not only investors and owners) and the impact on society. Us in tech are the ones that are implementing the vision, we are responsible too. Would not go to extremes and say everybody is a shill, since there has been serious innovation but we should be transparent of what is the cost of all that innovation. Just be honest with oneself (e.g. I'm working with this new fancy decentralized database instead of just buzzwording your way to success by blockchaining everything, etc). We need to drop the ego and work on what we love.
unimpressive 8y ago
This seems like an overly reactionary take. There's a lot of noise in any given hype cycle, distinguishing between unusual preferences people happen to have and manufactured interest isn't always easy. (See: The curious curious phenomena that humans put most of their personal information on the Internet where other people can see it.)
sotojuan 8y ago
Or they did the Fiverr ads for the NYC subways. There’s one that makes fun of people with white collar careers by calling them “chained down” and declaring that working for Fiverr in the gig economy is better.
- tmpz22 8y ago
  Saw this on the of a bus in SF and started laughing. Low pay contractor work is the way to get unchained in SF? You won't even be able to make rent unless you're in the top percentile.
  - robotbikes 8y ago
    I saw someone on fiverr offering to install Java on Ububtu Linux starting at 100$. That sounds about right. For the most part these sort of race to the bottom gigs would only work if your cost of living were really low relative to the $ amount. I did Amazon Turk work mainly out of curiosity/boredom, at one point I transcribed a conference call for some UK non-profit. I think it paid like 3-4$ and took me a few hours. I couldn't imagine actually living on that but I'm sure Amazon made some profit.
    - gowld 8y ago
      Who is someone who needs Java on Linux, but can't find the download button on Oracle's website, but can figure out how navigate the fiverr app/site?
- xkcd-sucks 8y ago
  "chained down" -> "securely anchored"
- elvirs 8y ago
  out of all 'on demand' companies Fiverr should keep its mouth shut. The quality of work there is pure garbage
- gowld 8y ago
  Fiverr ads try to glamorize taking a job where you can't afford to eat or sleep. https://www.newyorker.com/culture/jia-tolentino/the-gig-economy-celebrates-working-yourself-to-death https://www.newyorker.com/culture/jia-tolentino/the-gig-econ... I'm half expecting their business model is to tarnish the industry to badly that Uber et all pay them hush money to stop advertising.
briandear 8y ago
It helps the business owner and the consumer. Let’s not forget the consumer here. It also helps those willing to engage in gig activities. If Uber wasn’t marginally beneficial to drivers, why do they do it? Acting like Uber drivers are all idiots and need “protecting” is idiotic. If the economics don’t work, they quit.
- deleted 8y ago
  [deleted]
- gowld 8y ago
  You can't just quit a car loan. Switching costs. "Marginal benefit" isn't a win overall if it's combined with excessive fixed costs over overhead. This is basic Econ 101/102 stuff. If you fall in a hole, you get marginal benefits from trying to climb out. That doesn't make the hole good for you.
- gaius 8y ago
  If Uber wasn’t marginally beneficial to drivers, why do they do it? If HFCS wasn’t healthy, why do people eat it?
  - drdeca 8y ago
    Healthy and marginally beneficial aren't really synonymous. People value things other than just their health. Now, that isn't to say that it wouldn't be better if people consumed less HFCS. (But, isn't the ubiquity of HFCS partially due to corn subsidies? I think I heard that.) So, uh, when people purchase foods with HFCF I think it makes sense that this aligns with their marginal preferences. Does this mean it is to thei benefit? Hmm.
- rectang 8y ago
  It's a negotiation with severe information asymmetry. The business does hiring many times, so they reap the efficiencies of scale and get increasingly adept over time at hiding the risks they offload onto the contractors. To balance the information asymmetry, the contractors would need to pool their efforts similarly, and improve their ability to discover the true compensation. In other words, collective bargaining, with specialists who understand the full terms of the contract including all that's hidden in the fine print. <snark cantresist="true">All those government officials who pass laws crippling unions should stop treating business owners like idiots who need "protecting".</snark> Increasing unionizion has many side effects on the wider economy, and it's not my purpose to flog them. Instead, I'm merely trying to illustrate that each individual contractor is at a significant disadvantage when negotiating.
kbenson 8y ago
> Anyone who actually thought people gave a shit about chatbots was either deluded People don't need to give a shit about chatbots. A large amount of people deal with them all the time. Every time you decide to use chat to get help from some site that provides s service for you, what do you think the odds are you're first connected to a human? By having chatbots do the initial contact and information gathering, you can streamline the actual process and seamlessly connect and hand off to a real support rep after the rote info gathering is done, and provide them with the account number, a generalized idea of what the problem is, etc. Some requests can probably be handled entirely by the bot (need to change your password? That's easy to script). Chatbots are all around us, supplementing formal interactions.
- megaman22 8y ago
  Except everyone just spams 0 or "Representative" until they hit a real person, so the actual effect of the chatbot is a lot of money and hype wasted, and irritation on the end-user side.
- pilsetnieks 8y ago
  But that's not all it purported to be - sort of like a more intelligent IVR for customer support. Instead chatbots were promised to replace or supplement many online interactions, most notably shopping. But I guess people still go to Amazon in their browser or app, instead of trying to interact with a robot (Facebook Messenger? Whatsapp? Slack?)
- joe_the_user 8y ago
  Chatbot and phone robots are all around, gathering information, forwarding you to humans, who promptly ask you all the information again since they can't rely on the chatbots.
throwaway37585 8y ago
> helping anyone but business owners So you’re saying customers use those services for literally no reason.
- deleted 8y ago
  [deleted]
conanbatt 8y ago
> Anyone who actually thought the gig economy was helping anyone but business owners Consumers were losers?
- gleenn 8y ago
  Good riddance to the poorly upkept taxis with the aggressive drivers, and expensive rides. I feel like the drivers are not paid adequately though, esp. given the hidden expenses. I talk with them regularly and think many don't realize those costs. I always tip as a result, and I think Uber/Lyft give me better drivers as a result, though I can't be sure.
  - conanbatt 8y ago
    > I feel like the drivers are not paid adequately though, esp. given the hidden expenses. I talk with them regularly and think many don't realize those costs. I think that these kind of thoughts are simply not economics. If driving is bad money after all of that, eventually people will realize and it will all come crumbling down. But it cant be true if drivers keep working for years like this. It is also a stance that you can take only because you think there is something the government should do about it. There a a lot of carrers that are not financially sensical by some interpretation. Should artsists be banned or licensed to limit the number? Should Actors? Should QA analysts? etc etc. My point is that even if it is a bad deal for drivers, its their choice to make, and its not going to lead to a better outcome to make the choice for them.
- nerdponx 8y ago
  This is a good point. I was probably a little hyperbolic in my post. The existence of Uber has done a tremendous amount good in breaking up entrenced taxi industries, bringing service to some seriously under-served areas.
jlarocco 8y ago
> Anyone who actually thought the gig economy was helping anyone but business owners was either deluded or a shill. It's more accurate to say business owners and consumers are benefiting at the expense of the employees.
- knuththetruth 8y ago
  The idea that “consumers” are a separate class from employees is specious. There’s only labor and Capital owners, with the latter doing a wonderful job of turning the former against themselves.
  - drdeca 8y ago
    Perhaps people can benefit from something in their capacity as a consumer while it being a downside in their capacity as an employee, and then on net as a person either benefit from or experience a detriment from the change, depending on which of the two was larger? Like, suppose someone is selling some good and they get paid on commission, as like, some proportion of the purchase cost. If the price of goods of that sort go down (maybe one of the materials needed to manufacture it became more abundant?), then they would receive less income, but also not have to pay as much for different similar goods, and whether they are overall better or worse off would depend on the details.
  - andrewflnr 8y ago
    The roles of consumer, employee and employer are relative with respect to industry. The same person could occupy all three roles in different parts of their life (e.g small business owner who outsources, does GrubHub deliveries when business is slow, and uses Uber when they go out drinking. I'm not saying labor vs capital isn't also a useful perspective, but to say it's the only one ignores the complexity of reality.
  - jlarocco 8y ago
    Well clearly a consumer in one context is usually an employee (or capital owner) in another. In this particular case the consumers who are benefiting are generally a different group than the employees who are losing out, so I don't see why you bothered to point this out.
smallgovt 8y ago
>> Anyone who actually thought the gig economy was helping anyone but business owners was either deluded or a shill. That's quite a generalization you're making. Just because business owners are benefiting by pushing wages as low as the market will bear and reaping profits/growth, doesn't mean consumers/drivers aren't benefiting from the arrangement as well. Service providers are granted an additional at-will income opportunity. Consumers are granted a high-value low-cost service. Many will argue that the service providers are being tricked into the arrangement through hidden costs. However, a large sector of drivers actually rent their cars, which pretty much removes all hidden costs and proves to me that these gigs are a viable alternative to employment.
- s73v3r_ 8y ago
  "Many will argue that the service providers are being tricked into the arrangement through hidden costs. However, a large sector of drivers actually rent their cars, which pretty much removes all hidden costs and proves to me that these gigs are a viable alternative to employment." I'm going to highly disagree with you, there. I had a friend who tried renting the car from one of those companies. Nothing could be further from the truth than what you posted. It was basically the old "company store".
- collyw 8y ago
  I think its easy to be fooled. I am a Software Developer with a decent salary for where I live. I got offered a job a couple of years ago, where 3/4 of my wage was through an international company and the rest through a normal Spanish one. When I saw the amount going into my account every month, I thought I had hit the jackpot as it was way more than I expected. A while later when I got converted to a full Spanish contract, and my manager advised me to make sure I wasn't getting screwed. It was only then that I realized I hadn't actually been getting the pension payments on the 3/4 of my international contract up until then. What looked like a good deal hadn't actually been one at all. I would be surprised if people less educated than me would understand all the hidden costs.
reaperducer 8y ago
>Anyone who actually thought the gig economy was helping anyone but business owners was either deluded or a shill. Sometimes you just need a quick gig to make ends meet between jobs. Something you can pick up in a day or two and leave just as quickly. Full-time, long-term? No, it's not a great idea. But it's a good safety net when things get tough.
- nerdponx 8y ago
  How about an actual social safety net though?
  - mmirate 8y ago
    Those systems have a nasty habit of running out of other people's money.
    - ComradeTaco 8y ago
      Seem to work pretty okay in the rest of the developed world.
      - reaperducer 8y ago
        You'll have to be more specific about "okay" and "developed world." A lot of Americans point to Canada as an example, but it's a pretty bad example. If healthcare was so great in Canada, then there wouldn't be private hospitals in the United States that cater only to Canadians who go to America for the healthcare they can't get in Canada, or can't get in a timely fashion. In American towns where a lot of Canadians spend the winter, the radio stations are full of ads for these hospitals. (Palm Springs, for example.) If you mean the UK, the news over there is constantly full of horror stories about its NHS. Perhaps you can be more specific?
        nerdponx 8y ago
        Nationalized healthcare is one very extreme implementation of a specific subset of a social safety net.
exolymph 8y ago
It's more complex than that: https://www.inc.com/sonya-mann/gig-economy-worker-conditions.html https://www.inc.com/sonya-mann/gig-economy-worker-conditions...

xapata 8y ago

I used to drive pizza delivery. That promise of quick cash for driving has been around for a long time.

draw_down 8y ago
But pizza companies don’t care what kind of beater you drive the pizza in, as long as you tell them you have insurance.

kbenson 8y ago

> I've talked with bunch of car sharing drivers who were bamboozled with car loans, get hit by traffic infractions, costs of maintenance and the list goes on and on. I've seen a lot of the people that some cases of people that do it that are future minded and care about running the numbers just rent a car for the day. All of a sudden, you've abstracted away a lot of those variable costs to a third party. Unfortunately, I think the rental companies wised up after a while, and have wording in the contracts about ride-sharing now. I imagine in a large enough metro area, someone could (or has) abstract the vehicle and maintenance portion of the larger taxi services to specialized rental service for people that work in ride-sharing. Rent a ride-share car for a day, or more likely by the hour, and they'll make sure it's clean and in good running condition and meets the requirements for ride sharing service X, Y or Z. Specialized ride-sharing insurance optional... Actually, I imagine some of the existing taxi services in larger cities might have already shifted to this. Seems like a natural pivot, since they already have the majority of what's needed in place.

deleted 8y ago
[deleted]
mentat 8y ago
Rental car companies as the new taxi fleet companies would be an interesting turn. They're probably missing an opportunity here.
RandallBrown 8y ago
Uber has partnered with several rental companies specifically to rent out cars for ride sharing. https://www.uber.com/drive/vehicle-solutions/ https://www.uber.com/drive/vehicle-solutions/
joncrane 8y ago
This fleet maintenance outfit would be a perfect candidate to pivot to driverless car sharing when the technology becomes available.

the_cat_kittles 8y ago

bring back unions

briandear 8y ago
Are individuals incapable of making decisions on their own? Why shouldn’t the individual have the choice to drive or not drive as well as making decisions about their economic situation? Nobody is forced to drive. Nobody is forced to work for less than they value their labor. Unionizing Uber means dramatically high prices, which means less demand. There isn’t a magic pot of money just waiting to be distributed. If comes from consumer pockets. If Uber gets more expensive, I’ll drive myself. So that guy that would have made $10, now makes zero because he thinks he deserves $20. So he is actually worse off now. Markets don’t work in a vacuum — there are substitutes and you can’t “fix” a problem without unintended consequences. Let supply and demand work. Those that think they should earn more can quit and to sell their services to someone willing to pay their desired rates. If nobody will pay that desired rate, then it’s clear that the market doesn’t value that service that much. Why is supply and demand so hard for people to understand? We oppose industrial monopolies, why would we advocate for labor monopolies via unions?
- Thlom 8y ago
  Who said anything about monopolies? I though a union was just workers banding together and using their strength in number to negotiate better working conditions, better pay and so on? It's easy for someone with a sought after talent to say normal workers can just "quit and sell their services to someone willing to pay more", but that isn't an actual option for many many people.
- trophycase 8y ago
  Unions solve the coordination problem and nullify the leverage a corporation has over workers. This leverage imbalance creates imperfect markets, it doesn't facilitate it. People need to eat, they need to take time to find a new job, they need to build skills. High prices of medicine is a great example: They can get away with charging so much simply because there is an imbalance between how much you need them versus how much they need you.

agumonkey 8y ago

let's hope it will create a separate organ to let people work at lower pressure and yet not push up cost of service back to the old ways

kevin_b_er 8y ago

The gig enconomy's innovation was offloading risk entirely onto the "employees" who aren't employees, but "independent contractors" with no rights or recourse. This is a wealth consolidation practice yet again. The gig runners make money off the independent contractors because they take all the risk.

oculusthrift 8y ago

and what would these same people do instead? you’re pretending there’s some much better job out there waiting from the uber is preventing them from taking