7 ms·

"In some cases, no jobs is better than subsistence/dead-end/exploitative jobs" Sure, but neither you or I get to decide that qualification. Only the person doi

"In some cases, no jobs is better than subsistence/dead-end/exploitative jobs" Sure, but neither you or I get to decide that qualification. Only the person doing the job does. We don't really know what fits their lives or what options they have. I don't like gig stuff/sharing economy (or the big 'unicorns' associated with it) either...but it is "another option" for many people that wouldn't have one, esp. lower skilled immigrants, minorities, retired and young people.

toomuchtodo 7y ago
It's time to stop assuming startups are the solution to poor public policy. This is a thread topic in itself, but I cannot let the assertion stand ("any job is better than no job, what are you going to do about it?").
- eloff 7y ago
  On the contrary, it's better to do something as in a startup, than to complain about public policy. When your system is broken, try to fix it, when that fails, workaround it.
  - NikolaNovak 7y ago
    But... it's an extremely specific viewpoint that Startup / Technology solution is the way to fix broken system. For vast majority of people, the viewpoint would be that elected leaders making the "correct" decisions/rules (whatever we decide those are) is the actual long-term, proper fix. Technology is technology, it's a tool; and societal norms, rules, and regulations guide or decide how we use those tools.
    - eloff 7y ago
      In a perfect world sure. But doing nothing while waiting for a perfect world is far worse than fixing the problem at the wrong level.
  - Ar-Curunir 7y ago
    Startups, and specifically VC culture, do not have aligned incentives with fixing society; in the end, their aim is to make money, not improve society.
    - eloff 7y ago
      Yes. But most every company makes the world a better place in a way. People pay less for products and services than they get in value - otherwise they wouldn't pay. So everyone ends up better off. There are things like negative externalities that complicate the picture. In the specific case of uber, people benefit hugely from the service over the old way of how taxis worked (I know, I live in a place where ride sharing is illegal.) Uber's drivers can be thought of as exploited, but they're all there willingly, so I don't buy that for the most part. I've met so many drivers doing it parttime, entrepreneurs, students, retirees. They're better off for having options in general. Nobody is putting a gun to their heads.
- TAForObvReasons 7y ago
  You're on a site where a large number of people are either running their own startups, employed by other startups or thinking about building their own startup. Shouldn't be surprised that many people here believe that startups are a panacea
  - toomuchtodo 7y ago
    One mustn't be from the village to state the emperor has no clothes. Lots of smart people here, people who could be putting their effort into something with more leverage and impact. In the words of Toni Morrison (who recently left us): “When you get these jobs that you have been so brilliantly trained for, just remember that your real job is that if you are free, you need to free somebody else. If you have some power, then your job is to empower somebody else.”
rjkennedy98 7y ago
I feel like this misses something crucial to how most of these arrangements work: the worker is unable to put value on the gig. That is the real asymmetry. The gig worker's car wears down, requires gas, oil changes, and gets beat up by the road, but from his perspective he sees $25. Do you think Uber would even try to estimate that number?! (which they almost certainly could). Its essentially capitalization on a huge information asymmetry.
- eanzenberg 7y ago
  What happened to personal responsibility? Is that out the window as well? Or do we need intervention, similar to how parents point their kids in the proper direction to go?
  - everythingswan 7y ago
    I think the challenge is that the tech is moving so fast that there is no line where the judicial system has said: "Hey Uber, that's over the line." Credit Card and loan rates are two examples where some people would be so desperate that they would sign _anything_ to get an advance of cash or credit. But we have protection for them and rates cannot exceed a certain amount, depending on the type of loan.
    - IanCal 7y ago
      The judicial system in many places has said that Uber have crossed the line. It's been a big part of their business model.
  - semi-extrinsic 7y ago
    The point in having a society at all is the recognition that by agreeing on a set of rules, organizing ourselves to cooperate, people are better off. The "what about personal responsibility" can be applied to most things society offers you. Law enforcement? Buy your own gun and defend yourself. Firefighters? Buy your own water hose. Exploitive employers? Grow your own backbone.
dbuxton 7y ago
OP doesn’t mean “For some people it’s better to have no job than a bad job” (Maybe that’s true but as you say it’s their choice to make) He is saying: “For society, it’s actually harmful that we paper over the cracks of giving people on the margins of society confidence in how they can economically contribute and get meaning with unsustainable “jobs” rather than society actually being forced to confront this problem”.
anyfoo 7y ago
I disagree. You assume that all actors have everything that is required for them to make an assessment on their own, which mostly boils down to information and data, but also includes skill, available time, and even to a certain degree little things like the energy they have available to them to make such life decisions (which the poster you replied to included, I think). That is what we have regulations for. Do you know and understand what is in your shampoo bottle? What a car needs to come equipped with, not just in obvious safety features but also in its deeper and detailed implementation, to be safe for normal use ("normal use" itself being something you get taught in driving school)? How to build your own house, or even just how to recognize that a building you enter will not fall down onto your head? I, for myself, am very glad that regulations allow me to just assume certain ground truths in avoiding negative impact, without having to be an expert in every little thing that touches my life.
indalo 7y ago
I'm sorry but I disagree. Alluding to "maybe not knowing" whether someone wants to do something which has, plenty of times been demonstrated in economical and psychological terms to be detrimental is not a strong argument. It's just tossing a very sheer cover of "we don't know that" and ending there.
adamsea 7y ago
Of course we get to decide. As citizens we get to vote and have our say in what we think is right.
ilaksh 7y ago
A large number of Uber drivers in many countries including the US are not particularly young or old and are white and have skills or professional careers. The reason they drive for Uber is not a lack of skill. It's because they ran out of money and needed a job. Often having skills doesn't translate into having a good job. Good jobs are a limited resource per area and field.

toomuchtodo 7y ago

It's time to stop assuming startups are the solution to poor public policy. This is a thread topic in itself, but I cannot let the assertion stand ("any job is better than no job, what are you going to do about it?").

eloff 7y ago
On the contrary, it's better to do something as in a startup, than to complain about public policy. When your system is broken, try to fix it, when that fails, workaround it.
- NikolaNovak 7y ago
  But... it's an extremely specific viewpoint that Startup / Technology solution is the way to fix broken system. For vast majority of people, the viewpoint would be that elected leaders making the "correct" decisions/rules (whatever we decide those are) is the actual long-term, proper fix. Technology is technology, it's a tool; and societal norms, rules, and regulations guide or decide how we use those tools.
  - eloff 7y ago
    In a perfect world sure. But doing nothing while waiting for a perfect world is far worse than fixing the problem at the wrong level.
- Ar-Curunir 7y ago
  Startups, and specifically VC culture, do not have aligned incentives with fixing society; in the end, their aim is to make money, not improve society.
  - eloff 7y ago
    Yes. But most every company makes the world a better place in a way. People pay less for products and services than they get in value - otherwise they wouldn't pay. So everyone ends up better off. There are things like negative externalities that complicate the picture. In the specific case of uber, people benefit hugely from the service over the old way of how taxis worked (I know, I live in a place where ride sharing is illegal.) Uber's drivers can be thought of as exploited, but they're all there willingly, so I don't buy that for the most part. I've met so many drivers doing it parttime, entrepreneurs, students, retirees. They're better off for having options in general. Nobody is putting a gun to their heads.
TAForObvReasons 7y ago
You're on a site where a large number of people are either running their own startups, employed by other startups or thinking about building their own startup. Shouldn't be surprised that many people here believe that startups are a panacea
- toomuchtodo 7y ago
  One mustn't be from the village to state the emperor has no clothes. Lots of smart people here, people who could be putting their effort into something with more leverage and impact. In the words of Toni Morrison (who recently left us): “When you get these jobs that you have been so brilliantly trained for, just remember that your real job is that if you are free, you need to free somebody else. If you have some power, then your job is to empower somebody else.”

rjkennedy98 7y ago

I feel like this misses something crucial to how most of these arrangements work: the worker is unable to put value on the gig. That is the real asymmetry. The gig worker's car wears down, requires gas, oil changes, and gets beat up by the road, but from his perspective he sees $25. Do you think Uber would even try to estimate that number?! (which they almost certainly could). Its essentially capitalization on a huge information asymmetry.

eanzenberg 7y ago
What happened to personal responsibility? Is that out the window as well? Or do we need intervention, similar to how parents point their kids in the proper direction to go?
- everythingswan 7y ago
  I think the challenge is that the tech is moving so fast that there is no line where the judicial system has said: "Hey Uber, that's over the line." Credit Card and loan rates are two examples where some people would be so desperate that they would sign _anything_ to get an advance of cash or credit. But we have protection for them and rates cannot exceed a certain amount, depending on the type of loan.
  - IanCal 7y ago
    The judicial system in many places has said that Uber have crossed the line. It's been a big part of their business model.
- semi-extrinsic 7y ago
  The point in having a society at all is the recognition that by agreeing on a set of rules, organizing ourselves to cooperate, people are better off. The "what about personal responsibility" can be applied to most things society offers you. Law enforcement? Buy your own gun and defend yourself. Firefighters? Buy your own water hose. Exploitive employers? Grow your own backbone.

dbuxton 7y ago

OP doesn’t mean “For some people it’s better to have no job than a bad job” (Maybe that’s true but as you say it’s their choice to make) He is saying: “For society, it’s actually harmful that we paper over the cracks of giving people on the margins of society confidence in how they can economically contribute and get meaning with unsustainable “jobs” rather than society actually being forced to confront this problem”.

anyfoo 7y ago

I disagree. You assume that all actors have everything that is required for them to make an assessment on their own, which mostly boils down to information and data, but also includes skill, available time, and even to a certain degree little things like the energy they have available to them to make such life decisions (which the poster you replied to included, I think). That is what we have regulations for. Do you know and understand what is in your shampoo bottle? What a car needs to come equipped with, not just in obvious safety features but also in its deeper and detailed implementation, to be safe for normal use ("normal use" itself being something you get taught in driving school)? How to build your own house, or even just how to recognize that a building you enter will not fall down onto your head? I, for myself, am very glad that regulations allow me to just assume certain ground truths in avoiding negative impact, without having to be an expert in every little thing that touches my life.

indalo 7y ago

I'm sorry but I disagree. Alluding to "maybe not knowing" whether someone wants to do something which has, plenty of times been demonstrated in economical and psychological terms to be detrimental is not a strong argument. It's just tossing a very sheer cover of "we don't know that" and ending there.

adamsea 7y ago

Of course we get to decide. As citizens we get to vote and have our say in what we think is right.

ilaksh 7y ago

A large number of Uber drivers in many countries including the US are not particularly young or old and are white and have skills or professional careers. The reason they drive for Uber is not a lack of skill. It's because they ran out of money and needed a job. Often having skills doesn't translate into having a good job. Good jobs are a limited resource per area and field.