2 ms·

Alternative take: Tech companies are allowing people to make money where before they couldn't. I was poor once. It would have been freaking awesome to be able

Alternative take: Tech companies are allowing people to make money where before they couldn't. I was poor once. It would have been freaking awesome to be able to deliver some food or drive someone somewhere to make a couple of bucks, the alternative was sitting around making zero bucks. This sentiment is shared with nearly every Uber driver I speak to about it. They are happy for the opportunity to make money in their spare time. Technology enabled this and it's a good thing. People who say otherwise probably have never been poor and bereft of any option to make money.

core-questions 7y ago
This is a good take, for sure. The problem comes in when people start to look at these gig-economy roles as though they're "jobs", when they're not - they're a new thing occupying a new niche, and while you can cobble them together to make job-like money, it's not at all the same thing, and it probably wouldn't work if you tried to make it like a job.
TrackerFF 7y ago
If you're poor and desperate, you're probably also agreeing to devalue your own time. If you feel that netting $3/hr is a good deal, because it's better than $0, that's one thing - but you're also enabling this thing to be generalized to others. This is rampant in the creative world. Hungry and desperate musicians racing to the bottom, because getting paid _anything_ over nothing is "better". What happens is that they're devaluing the whole industry, and suddenly "paid in exposure" is a thing. I understand that being poor can be hard, and short-term fixes can be tempting; But people need to see the whole picture.
- malvosenior 7y ago
  > I understand that being poor can be hard, and short-term fixes can be tempting; But people need to see the whole picture. You can’t expect people to skip meals or rent because it may be helpful down the road in someone else’s labor negotiation.

core-questions 7y ago

This is a good take, for sure. The problem comes in when people start to look at these gig-economy roles as though they're "jobs", when they're not - they're a new thing occupying a new niche, and while you can cobble them together to make job-like money, it's not at all the same thing, and it probably wouldn't work if you tried to make it like a job.

TrackerFF 7y ago

If you're poor and desperate, you're probably also agreeing to devalue your own time. If you feel that netting $3/hr is a good deal, because it's better than $0, that's one thing - but you're also enabling this thing to be generalized to others. This is rampant in the creative world. Hungry and desperate musicians racing to the bottom, because getting paid _anything_ over nothing is "better". What happens is that they're devaluing the whole industry, and suddenly "paid in exposure" is a thing. I understand that being poor can be hard, and short-term fixes can be tempting; But people need to see the whole picture.

malvosenior 7y ago
> I understand that being poor can be hard, and short-term fixes can be tempting; But people need to see the whole picture. You can’t expect people to skip meals or rent because it may be helpful down the road in someone else’s labor negotiation.