4 ms·

There's a strange political narrative (in California and elsewhere) that people can't possibly make their own living without being ripped off. All it's doing i

There's a strange political narrative (in California and elsewhere) that people can't possibly make their own living without being ripped off. All it's doing is taking freedom and choice away by squashing freelancers, not creating any new opportunities.

katmannthree 7y ago
I think the point is more to set the floor for work conditions (such as with minimum wage laws) so that the very desperate and those who have difficulty assessing long-term costs (such as with MLMs or Uber) don't set the minimum conditions for everyone.
- manigandham 7y ago
  So set the floor and increase education. This regulation doesn't do any of that, instead it just removes that way of working as if these people can't make the choice for themselves.
  - katmannthree 7y ago
    How do you set that floor if not with this (or similar) regulation? I'm 100% with you on increasing education, but that has a delayed effect of many years. And even with the delay, there will likely always be some people who need to make rent or feed their kids who'll accept the equivalent of a $5/hr job because it's all they can get. I was once that person, filling out quizzes on amazon's mechanical turk for what was effectively about $4/hr. I appreciate having had the work, but it still feels like a loophole around having a minimum wage. I've been on the 1099 side of the fence for a handful of jobs. It's a difficult place. You're on your own for a large portion of taxes and likely need to make estimated quarterly payments, there are no benefits (health insurance, etc), and there's a tangible lack of stability compared to a standard W2 situation. The only solution I see is twofold, first providing adequate social services so that people can survive reeducation / changing careers and then legislation exactly like this which ensures that employers act in a manner that's compatible with long-term social stability.
    - foogazi 7y ago
      > I appreciate having had the work, but it still feels like a loophole around having a minimum wage. Do you think there is a place for sub-minimum wage jobs?
      - katmannthree 7y ago
        Not in this country[0], no. If you allow a company to set the floor for their market with sub-living wages, then all other companies need to either match the low wages to stay competitive or they'll eventually fail or be taken over. On a slightly broader scale, I don't see any mechanism by which markets self-regulate to police unethical behavior. All I see is the opposite, companies rebranding when their image gets tarnished and hiring PR firms to lie to people but they don't actually stop behaving unethically. Even in rare cases when they get fined, oftentimes the fines are less than the profit they made from the specific actions they were fined for. [0] Global issues, trade, outsourcing, etc are a far bigger discussion.
        foogazi 7y ago
        > If you allow a company to set the floor for their market with sub-living wages, then all other companies need to either match the low wages to stay competitive or they'll eventually fail or be taken over. If that is the case why aren’t we all making minimum wage?
        katmannthree 7y ago
        Because we're talking about the floor of employment, unskilled / seasonal / temp labor. Different dynamics apply when you have valuable skills that make you harder (read: more costly) to replace. The people on the floor, whether they're there because they're just starting out or because they've experienced hardships or just because they don't want to go further, those people, shouldn't have to be living on the streets or go bankrupt from medical expenses. That's the entire point behind a minimum wage.
    - manigandham 7y ago
  - fzeroracer 7y ago
    Except we already have the floor. It's called being labeled an 'employee'. Independent contractors are a way of companies getting around the floor. So you either modify the floor so that contractors have the same benefits as employees, or you make them employees. Both of which are fundamentally the same thing.
    - manigandham 7y ago
      The problem is thinking it's only about the companies. The job of professional driver has existed for a long time. People working as freelancers specifically don't want a job for whatever reason. Why should that freedom be taken away? Why must contractors have the same benefits? They have the choice to make whatever deal they want. A better strategy would be healthcare and taxes that aren't tied to employment so that contractors can more easily match employee terms.
friendlybus 7y ago
I see the same narrative in normal joes outside the political sphere. Some people really rely on mitigating risk to the point where work or income is guaranteed.
r00fus 7y ago
There are no absolute freedoms, otherwise we'd be fine with pay-for-hits markets like what was revealed in the silkroad investigation or child labor. Everything is nuanced and regulated to some degree. The question is where you draw the line, and there's real difference of opinion on this front. The fact we have different states experimenting with these laws is what makes the US form of Federalism great. Expect more legislation and regulation of the new markets created by AirBnB, Bitcoin and Uber.
- manigandham 7y ago
  Are you a freelancer? What if someone told you can no longer the way you want because someone thinks they know better than you? Protecting people from themselves to the point of eliminating personal freedom and choice isn't going to help anyone.

katmannthree 7y ago

I think the point is more to set the floor for work conditions (such as with minimum wage laws) so that the very desperate and those who have difficulty assessing long-term costs (such as with MLMs or Uber) don't set the minimum conditions for everyone.

manigandham 7y ago
So set the floor and increase education. This regulation doesn't do any of that, instead it just removes that way of working as if these people can't make the choice for themselves.
- katmannthree 7y ago
  How do you set that floor if not with this (or similar) regulation? I'm 100% with you on increasing education, but that has a delayed effect of many years. And even with the delay, there will likely always be some people who need to make rent or feed their kids who'll accept the equivalent of a $5/hr job because it's all they can get. I was once that person, filling out quizzes on amazon's mechanical turk for what was effectively about $4/hr. I appreciate having had the work, but it still feels like a loophole around having a minimum wage. I've been on the 1099 side of the fence for a handful of jobs. It's a difficult place. You're on your own for a large portion of taxes and likely need to make estimated quarterly payments, there are no benefits (health insurance, etc), and there's a tangible lack of stability compared to a standard W2 situation. The only solution I see is twofold, first providing adequate social services so that people can survive reeducation / changing careers and then legislation exactly like this which ensures that employers act in a manner that's compatible with long-term social stability.
  - foogazi 7y ago
    > I appreciate having had the work, but it still feels like a loophole around having a minimum wage. Do you think there is a place for sub-minimum wage jobs?
    - katmannthree 7y ago
      Not in this country[0], no. If you allow a company to set the floor for their market with sub-living wages, then all other companies need to either match the low wages to stay competitive or they'll eventually fail or be taken over. On a slightly broader scale, I don't see any mechanism by which markets self-regulate to police unethical behavior. All I see is the opposite, companies rebranding when their image gets tarnished and hiring PR firms to lie to people but they don't actually stop behaving unethically. Even in rare cases when they get fined, oftentimes the fines are less than the profit they made from the specific actions they were fined for. [0] Global issues, trade, outsourcing, etc are a far bigger discussion.
      - foogazi 7y ago
        > If you allow a company to set the floor for their market with sub-living wages, then all other companies need to either match the low wages to stay competitive or they'll eventually fail or be taken over. If that is the case why aren’t we all making minimum wage?
        katmannthree 7y ago
        Because we're talking about the floor of employment, unskilled / seasonal / temp labor. Different dynamics apply when you have valuable skills that make you harder (read: more costly) to replace. The people on the floor, whether they're there because they're just starting out or because they've experienced hardships or just because they don't want to go further, those people, shouldn't have to be living on the streets or go bankrupt from medical expenses. That's the entire point behind a minimum wage.
  - manigandham 7y ago
- fzeroracer 7y ago
  Except we already have the floor. It's called being labeled an 'employee'. Independent contractors are a way of companies getting around the floor. So you either modify the floor so that contractors have the same benefits as employees, or you make them employees. Both of which are fundamentally the same thing.
  - manigandham 7y ago
    The problem is thinking it's only about the companies. The job of professional driver has existed for a long time. People working as freelancers specifically don't want a job for whatever reason. Why should that freedom be taken away? Why must contractors have the same benefits? They have the choice to make whatever deal they want. A better strategy would be healthcare and taxes that aren't tied to employment so that contractors can more easily match employee terms.

friendlybus 7y ago

I see the same narrative in normal joes outside the political sphere. Some people really rely on mitigating risk to the point where work or income is guaranteed.

r00fus 7y ago

There are no absolute freedoms, otherwise we'd be fine with pay-for-hits markets like what was revealed in the silkroad investigation or child labor. Everything is nuanced and regulated to some degree. The question is where you draw the line, and there's real difference of opinion on this front. The fact we have different states experimenting with these laws is what makes the US form of Federalism great. Expect more legislation and regulation of the new markets created by AirBnB, Bitcoin and Uber.

manigandham 7y ago
Are you a freelancer? What if someone told you can no longer the way you want because someone thinks they know better than you? Protecting people from themselves to the point of eliminating personal freedom and choice isn't going to help anyone.