4 ms·
Totally agree. Very often people will analyze a snapshot of a scenario, recognize something they want to change, and campaign for change without considering how
by dahfizz 7y ago
Totally agree. Very often people will analyze a snapshot of a scenario, recognize something they want to change, and campaign for change without considering how the system will change. They fixate on that one variable.
"Uber drivers are not paid as well as they should. Let's mandate that wages go up!"
Expected outcome: wages change and nothing else. The people who are currently underpaid get a big raise.
Real outcome: The market adjusts and Uber only hires professional drivers, who were earning about the same anyway. Previous Uber drivers are unemployed.
- _Codemonkeyism 7y agohttps://fs.blog/2016/04/second-order-thinking/ https://fs.blog/2016/04/second-order-thinking/
- vidarh 7y agoWhere is this huge pool of more professional drivers who are unemployed waiting for Uber to add additional benefits before making the leap? Because if they're not unemployed, then if Uber suddenly starts competing for them, other jobs are being freed up. While some individuals may be affected, it seems highly unlikely that there is enough slack in the labor supply in that market that the addition of a few benefits will let Uber suddenly make large shifts in who they let work for them. Especially given that Uber already have a huge amount of hard data on which drivers do best with them anyway, and so it will continue to make far more sense for Uber to manage drivers based on actual performance.