4 ms·

I'm sorry, but this all just sounds like free market ideology. We are saying the same thing. You just think someone needs to be at fault and there are good guys

I'm sorry, but this all just sounds like free market ideology. We are saying the same thing. You just think someone needs to be at fault and there are good guys vs bad guys. I'm talking to an individual. Please refer the comment I was replying to. I'm not trying to make generalized ideological debates about the gig economy or taxation or any other of the typically religious arguments people shout at each other about online. To an _individual_ it is important for them to realize that they need to account for the risk involved in what they are doing. If you drive for a company as an employee and get injured and can never work again, you will receive payments from them for the rest of your life. If you do it as a contractor you will be disabled and at best be able to receive the very limited US government disability which would force you to live in poverty. Remember, driving all day is one of the most dangerous types of professions. And absolutely no, you cannot get an individual workers compensation policy because it would cost more money than the income from the gig. Its absurd you would think that exists. Please do not go into online forums and just shoot idealism everywhere. We get it, you hate big government and taxation is theft. We've all heard it 10 million times. Unless it has a unique connection to the topic being discussed, you are just derailing the conversation.

username444 7y ago
I think you're missing the point as well, and that may be a generational difference. You value security and loyalty, because that's what your generation was raised with. My generation has no delusions of job security. It does not and will not exist in our future. We value independence and freedom, and the opportunity to pursue our careers. I've done contract work my entire life and wouldn't have it any other way. I do not want to be tied to a company. I earn much, much work working independently. My insurance is my savings account. My insurance is my adaptability. My insurance is my skillset. Your reply indicates that you think that has something to do with idealism, and it doesn't. We want to do work, get paid for it, and fuck off to the next thing. You don't have to agree with it, just don't participate in it if you don't. But don't try to get in the way of other people doing what they want because you don't understand it.
- momokoko 7y ago
  No. The comment was off topic. I was replying to an individual. And then someone decided to add a reply to my comment with typical internet free market talking points. I was not discussing these debated to death boring religious debates about government and taxation. I was talking to an individual. Please refer to the comment I was originally replying to for context. For an individual, the loss of worker compensation is a very very significant thing to consider. Driving is a very dangerous job. Most police officer deaths each year are from automobile accidents. Whether they should make that choice, or if a society should allow it, was absolutely nowhere in any way at all in my comment. Please reread my comment as it appears you seem to have missed that. If you want to rehash the same typical talking points we've all heard 10,000 times, please do it in a different thread. I have a very difficult time seeing how repeating things that have been said so many times does anything but waste all of our time here.
  - lightedman 7y ago
    Maybe rehashing those points often enough will get your lazy ass inspired to get up and actually do something about it. Or you can continue to be lazy and disingenuous, your choice, after all.
  - CryptoPunk 7y ago
    These are not ideological talking points. They are basic economics. Believing that markets work according to principles like the law of supply and demand is as ideological as believing that vaccines reduce population wide mortality.
- aiisjustanif 7y ago
  Ring ring Your generation calling. You can take your anecdotal statement and your "my generation" and kindly keep it to yourself. Not to mention, "Our generation" is so different thinking about this across countries that this idea is just so odd. It's not realistic. It's not scalable to all people. It's survivalistic. You will get tired. You will get sick. You might have a family. You will affect others. You will die one day. Your skill set won't save you. Your adaptability won't save you. Your material possessions won't save you. And your savings might not be able to even save you. You will live in a community and by extension affect one. It is a fool's game to act as if youth and health are infinite. We can have work freedom, that's fine. But without a community, a caring society, a caring government, something to back us up. When the work is gone and we are sick, distressed, and at out most helpless we will have nothing but our hopeful savings to help us. And honestly that's naive to think is a enough imo.
elcinr 7y ago
Their comment was fine. Relax. They discussed why it actually might be more risky from an individual's perspective to be an employee than a contractor. In my opinion anyway the individual perspective is a moot point. Unless there's some serious shortage of access to information the main consideration should be the benefit to society as a whole and not just a single company. How much more stable will a business and its impact on commerce be if it does provide reduced-premium insurance is the more important question to ask.
AnthonyMouse 7y ago
> I'm not trying to make generalized ideological debates about the gig economy or taxation or any other of the typically religious arguments people shout at each other about online. You are in a discussion attached to an article about a piece of proposed legislation. It was a policy discussion from the start. > To an _individual_ it is important for them to realize that they need to account for the risk involved in what they are doing. That is true, but is it novel information that nobody is aware of? That seems to be the standard you want to apply. > And absolutely no, you cannot get an individual workers compensation policy because it would cost more money than the income from the gig. Its absurd you would think that exists. Disability insurance is typically 1-3% of your income because the payout in the event of a claim is proportional to your income. For the low income in most of these professions that comes to somewhere around $50/month. They may decide it isn't worth that much, but there is no basis to the idea that it would cost more than their overall compensation. > Please do not go into online forums and just shoot idealism everywhere. This feels like a double standard that in practice just means that you would prefer it if people with contrary opinions to yours would shut up.
- momokoko 7y ago
  > This feels like a double standard that in practice just means that you would prefer it if people with contrary opinions to yours would shut up. No. Those opinions on either side of the debate have been done to absolute death online. I can't imagine a single person you could find on this forum that could not list for you the common talking points(for and against) government taxation and regulation. That is what these comments are about. Not detailed, unique, and specific insight into this particular situation. Just mindless regurgitation of the same stuff we've all heard way more times than is needed. > That is true, but is it novel information that nobody is aware of? That seems to be the standard you want to apply. Most people I talk to about workers compensation do not realize how different the outcomes are for them between contractor and employee. The most common ones people are aware of is that they have to pay both sides of their social security. Unemployment insurance is also something that some people do not realize. During that last economic slowdown, the US government extended unemployment benefits for years to millions of US workers. Contractors will not be eligible for any of that assistance in the next economic downturn. See how that information is relevant and specific to the original comment(not article) I was responding to? They discussed how they did not see many downsides with being a gig worker. I was bringing up a couple, especially workers compensation because of how dangerous driving jobs are. I never said GrubHub should or should not provide that. I certainly never mentioned if the US government should do anything. I would recommend that you please go back to my original comment and the comment I was replying to originally for more information and context.

username444 7y ago

I think you're missing the point as well, and that may be a generational difference. You value security and loyalty, because that's what your generation was raised with. My generation has no delusions of job security. It does not and will not exist in our future. We value independence and freedom, and the opportunity to pursue our careers. I've done contract work my entire life and wouldn't have it any other way. I do not want to be tied to a company. I earn much, much work working independently. My insurance is my savings account. My insurance is my adaptability. My insurance is my skillset. Your reply indicates that you think that has something to do with idealism, and it doesn't. We want to do work, get paid for it, and fuck off to the next thing. You don't have to agree with it, just don't participate in it if you don't. But don't try to get in the way of other people doing what they want because you don't understand it.

momokoko 7y ago
No. The comment was off topic. I was replying to an individual. And then someone decided to add a reply to my comment with typical internet free market talking points. I was not discussing these debated to death boring religious debates about government and taxation. I was talking to an individual. Please refer to the comment I was originally replying to for context. For an individual, the loss of worker compensation is a very very significant thing to consider. Driving is a very dangerous job. Most police officer deaths each year are from automobile accidents. Whether they should make that choice, or if a society should allow it, was absolutely nowhere in any way at all in my comment. Please reread my comment as it appears you seem to have missed that. If you want to rehash the same typical talking points we've all heard 10,000 times, please do it in a different thread. I have a very difficult time seeing how repeating things that have been said so many times does anything but waste all of our time here.
- lightedman 7y ago
  Maybe rehashing those points often enough will get your lazy ass inspired to get up and actually do something about it. Or you can continue to be lazy and disingenuous, your choice, after all.
- CryptoPunk 7y ago
  These are not ideological talking points. They are basic economics. Believing that markets work according to principles like the law of supply and demand is as ideological as believing that vaccines reduce population wide mortality.
aiisjustanif 7y ago
Ring ring Your generation calling. You can take your anecdotal statement and your "my generation" and kindly keep it to yourself. Not to mention, "Our generation" is so different thinking about this across countries that this idea is just so odd. It's not realistic. It's not scalable to all people. It's survivalistic. You will get tired. You will get sick. You might have a family. You will affect others. You will die one day. Your skill set won't save you. Your adaptability won't save you. Your material possessions won't save you. And your savings might not be able to even save you. You will live in a community and by extension affect one. It is a fool's game to act as if youth and health are infinite. We can have work freedom, that's fine. But without a community, a caring society, a caring government, something to back us up. When the work is gone and we are sick, distressed, and at out most helpless we will have nothing but our hopeful savings to help us. And honestly that's naive to think is a enough imo.

elcinr 7y ago

Their comment was fine. Relax. They discussed why it actually might be more risky from an individual's perspective to be an employee than a contractor. In my opinion anyway the individual perspective is a moot point. Unless there's some serious shortage of access to information the main consideration should be the benefit to society as a whole and not just a single company. How much more stable will a business and its impact on commerce be if it does provide reduced-premium insurance is the more important question to ask.

AnthonyMouse 7y ago

> I'm not trying to make generalized ideological debates about the gig economy or taxation or any other of the typically religious arguments people shout at each other about online. You are in a discussion attached to an article about a piece of proposed legislation. It was a policy discussion from the start. > To an _individual_ it is important for them to realize that they need to account for the risk involved in what they are doing. That is true, but is it novel information that nobody is aware of? That seems to be the standard you want to apply. > And absolutely no, you cannot get an individual workers compensation policy because it would cost more money than the income from the gig. Its absurd you would think that exists. Disability insurance is typically 1-3% of your income because the payout in the event of a claim is proportional to your income. For the low income in most of these professions that comes to somewhere around $50/month. They may decide it isn't worth that much, but there is no basis to the idea that it would cost more than their overall compensation. > Please do not go into online forums and just shoot idealism everywhere. This feels like a double standard that in practice just means that you would prefer it if people with contrary opinions to yours would shut up.

momokoko 7y ago
> This feels like a double standard that in practice just means that you would prefer it if people with contrary opinions to yours would shut up. No. Those opinions on either side of the debate have been done to absolute death online. I can't imagine a single person you could find on this forum that could not list for you the common talking points(for and against) government taxation and regulation. That is what these comments are about. Not detailed, unique, and specific insight into this particular situation. Just mindless regurgitation of the same stuff we've all heard way more times than is needed. > That is true, but is it novel information that nobody is aware of? That seems to be the standard you want to apply. Most people I talk to about workers compensation do not realize how different the outcomes are for them between contractor and employee. The most common ones people are aware of is that they have to pay both sides of their social security. Unemployment insurance is also something that some people do not realize. During that last economic slowdown, the US government extended unemployment benefits for years to millions of US workers. Contractors will not be eligible for any of that assistance in the next economic downturn. See how that information is relevant and specific to the original comment(not article) I was responding to? They discussed how they did not see many downsides with being a gig worker. I was bringing up a couple, especially workers compensation because of how dangerous driving jobs are. I never said GrubHub should or should not provide that. I certainly never mentioned if the US government should do anything. I would recommend that you please go back to my original comment and the comment I was replying to originally for more information and context.