3 ms·

I mean, if you need people starving and rioting in the street to obtain your policy goals, maybe that’s a good point to stop and rethink?

• whataboutisms 7y ago
  You have it backwards. The policy goal is to avoid starving and rioting in the streets.
• colinyoung 7y ago
  This comment is wildly out of touch with how power works and change happens in this world
  • zaroth 7y ago
    I’m not taking the flame bait. TFA is discussing the app economy for last mile delivery, a market which TFA admits was previously largely exploitative of illegal immigrant labor paid under the table and often abused in the process. The is a prime example where the world has changed for the better through software. The job is now above board, tracked, and accounted in ways that make it better paying, more reliable and even safer work. The competitiveness of the marketplace will only ensure these jobs become even better paying and safer over time. Exceedingly low job switching costs is a massive contributor to the competitive forces which lead to these advances, which in fact serve to protect low skilled workers from otherwise abusive employers. Every delivery app platform lives in absolute fear of all their contractors switching to the competition because they found a way to more efficiently schedule, queue, route, deliver, fulfill their customers and therefore can pay the couriers a higher rate or ensure them more profitable routes or a larger tip share.
• AtlasBarfed 7y ago
  Rethink the policy, or rethink the fundamentally broken pro-rich government? The goal of government is apparently to give the poor as little as possible to help themselves and keep them from rioting, and therefore any policy that doesn't risk (too much) rioting from that is "good policy"? Come on.