> This is a non sequitur. Inequality doesn’t need to go down for workers to get better living conditions. Even if this was true, and there is a mountain of emp

> This is a non sequitur. Inequality doesn’t need to go down for workers to get better living conditions. Even if this was true, and there is a mountain of empirical data suggesting it isn't, do you really believe inequality can just keep increasing and everything will be fine? > So Uber does make their life better. Well, Uber drivers are cogs in a machine and micromanaged by computer programs, but at least they drive a car. Perhaps biking would be healthier for them, but on the other hand there are some who have to live in the car, so I guess you're right. > How much money should Uber give to politicians to spend inneficiently or to be lost in corruption before you consider them to be respecting human rights? Whatever the law of each country they are operating on says + respecting the local labor laws instead of pretending that their employees are not employees. It's not for Uber of any other company to decide weather the politicians and the laws they enact are good or not. That's the job of the voters. > Providing comfort is a service that improves our collective condition. Seems like a bit of a zero-sum game to me. Some people's lives become less comfortable so that other's can become more comfortable. But comfort is pretty irrelevant in face of the real existential threats that we are facing, in part being caused by the current infinite growth economical paradigm.