4 ms·

> I can see the effect being that some drivers who were underperforming (those who were earning effectively below minimum wage) simply won't be able to do it an

> I can see the effect being that some drivers who were underperforming (those who were earning effectively below minimum wage) simply won't be able to do it anymore, which again is fine since that means a lucky few can earn minimum wage. Why is that fine? Why do some people not get to work because you decided it's not enough for them?

matt-attack 7y ago
> Remember that the minimum wage law provides no jobs: it only outlaws them; and outlawed jobs are the inevitable result. -Murray Rothbard
chrischen 7y ago
It’s what we’ve decided is acceptable as a society. It’s not obvious if you call it “minimum wage” vs say “maximum jobs” (like how we have a cap for doctors). Both achieve the same thing, both are standard policies we’ve adopted.
- ltbarcly3 7y ago
  There is a huge difference between limiting the number of graduate school educated, highly paid professionals for the benefit of society, and limiting the number of subsistence level gig jobs. In the case of doctors, it's important that we reward professionalism and the hard work necessary so that hard working and smart people find it to be a good career choice. For someone who would have become a doctor if there were no cap but is denied in the current system, they still have a 4 year degree and can pursue another highly educated but less selective profession. Keep in mind, however, that we aren't pretending to do this for the benefit of doctors. For gig workers, most are doing it because this is their fallback. They may not have another alternative to make money, they may have just lost a job, the industry they work in may be having a down cycle and they are laid off. If they could get another job that paid more they probably would, but this is their last resort. If you take away their freedom to agree to do this work on terms that both sides find acceptable, they just don't have an income. Then you pretend you are doing it for their benefit! Fantastic! You can't compare the two situations, one is slightly reducing list of career choices of a college graduate at the beginning of their career, the other is taking food out of someone's mouth. The other large group of gig workers are people who already have a day job and are supplementing their income. Can you come up with some kind of self righteous 'society has chosen' excuse for limiting their freedom to do so? Finally, saying that the reason that we should pass a law to do something is that 'society has decided' to pass that law is a profoundly lazy argument that justifies literally any law that gets passed. They passed a law to make it mandatory to sing in the shower? Anyone caught not singing in the shower will be fined and possibly imprisoned? This seems wrong, why would we want this law? Oh, right, society has decided that is what is acceptable.
  - chrischen 7y ago
    I think you're missing the fact that I'm subtly agreeing with you. The fact that it's easy to make your argument against me is because I've presented it in a way to obviously see how limiting jobs is bad. It's just disguised under normal circumstances.

matt-attack 7y ago

> Remember that the minimum wage law provides no jobs: it only outlaws them; and outlawed jobs are the inevitable result. -Murray Rothbard

chrischen 7y ago

It’s what we’ve decided is acceptable as a society. It’s not obvious if you call it “minimum wage” vs say “maximum jobs” (like how we have a cap for doctors). Both achieve the same thing, both are standard policies we’ve adopted.

ltbarcly3 7y ago
There is a huge difference between limiting the number of graduate school educated, highly paid professionals for the benefit of society, and limiting the number of subsistence level gig jobs. In the case of doctors, it's important that we reward professionalism and the hard work necessary so that hard working and smart people find it to be a good career choice. For someone who would have become a doctor if there were no cap but is denied in the current system, they still have a 4 year degree and can pursue another highly educated but less selective profession. Keep in mind, however, that we aren't pretending to do this for the benefit of doctors. For gig workers, most are doing it because this is their fallback. They may not have another alternative to make money, they may have just lost a job, the industry they work in may be having a down cycle and they are laid off. If they could get another job that paid more they probably would, but this is their last resort. If you take away their freedom to agree to do this work on terms that both sides find acceptable, they just don't have an income. Then you pretend you are doing it for their benefit! Fantastic! You can't compare the two situations, one is slightly reducing list of career choices of a college graduate at the beginning of their career, the other is taking food out of someone's mouth. The other large group of gig workers are people who already have a day job and are supplementing their income. Can you come up with some kind of self righteous 'society has chosen' excuse for limiting their freedom to do so? Finally, saying that the reason that we should pass a law to do something is that 'society has decided' to pass that law is a profoundly lazy argument that justifies literally any law that gets passed. They passed a law to make it mandatory to sing in the shower? Anyone caught not singing in the shower will be fined and possibly imprisoned? This seems wrong, why would we want this law? Oh, right, society has decided that is what is acceptable.
- chrischen 7y ago
  I think you're missing the fact that I'm subtly agreeing with you. The fact that it's easy to make your argument against me is because I've presented it in a way to obviously see how limiting jobs is bad. It's just disguised under normal circumstances.