9 ms·

If there was an alternative, higher wage they would pick that. This is the market labor cost.

redis_mlc 6y ago
> If there was an alternative, higher wage they would pick that. This is the market labor cost. Cue the obligatory pedantic HN Econ 101 analysis. Actually, most interviews with Turks say the payment is less important than being able to do hits between classes, or without any commuting. Also, some workloads are done on Turk as carefully planned statistical trials, which cannot easily be done offline. So, nothing to do with HN Econ 101 today. Class is out.
MichaelGlass 6y ago
"below market" because Instacart (and uber, etc) forgo normal labor law, have by-default but not by-contract full-time workers without any full-time benefits. Companies can achieve great benefit by externalizing cost on society, but should they? (And should they be able to?) e.g. https://www.forbes.com/sites/ebauer/2019/12/16/is-uber-cheating-on-social-securityfica-taxes/#5289694a3ce4 https://www.forbes.com/sites/ebauer/2019/12/16/is-uber-cheat... https://www.forbes.com/sites/clareoconnor/2014/04/15/report-walmart-workers-cost-taxpayers-6-2-billion-in-public-assistance/#4e9896de720b https://www.forbes.com/sites/clareoconnor/2014/04/15/report-...
- godzillabrennus 6y ago
  Free market idealists think the market can determine the minimum wage without government or organized labor enforcing higher wages.
  - brorfred 6y ago
    Free market idealists also tend to be very against the natural way for workers to consolidate and leverage negotiation power: trade unions.
    - black_puppydog 6y ago
      Yeah, I never understood how "free everything" advocates tend to be so much against the freedom of the individual to refer decisions/actions to a collective when that happens to be the better course of action.
      - D895n9o33436N42 6y ago
        “Free market” isn’t “free everything”. In a free market the bid-ask spread is king. It’s just another kind of tyranny, which, like all such things, benefits those who are set up to take advantage of it, and leaves most others in the dust.
      - floor2 6y ago
        Maybe your lack of understanding is because you're arguing against an imaginary straw man? A group forming a collective and negotiating as such fits perfectly fine with free market ideals. This exists in many forms that all manner of libertarian, free-market, whatever label people are OK with. When that group uses violence, threats and coercion to their benefit is where people object. Examples - blocking an employer from hiring non-union employees, harming or threatening to harm workers during a strike, forcing people to join a union to get/keep a job, preventing new workers or new firms from entering the market through regulation, etc. If you want to say "You can hire these 20 union workers at a rate of $$$, we all stand together" that's fine. When you say "You need to hire these 20 union workers, and if you don't, we'll surround your business and threaten, harass and intimidate the people you hire instead" is where you've jumped into violence and extortion rather than free market negotiation.
    - WoodenChair 6y ago
      I think people in this thread are confusing "free market idealists" (usually libertarians) with conservatives/Republicans. A free market idealist has no problem with a free labor market that self-organizes into unions as long as the government doesn't mandate unionization. Conservatives and Republicans tend to advocate for big business and have therefore a natural antipathy towards organized labor.
  - specialist 6y ago
    The Freedom Markets™ faithful proclaim - efficient markets - rational actors - no transaction costs - power imbalances are moot Any notions otherwise are apostate and must be purged.
- madsbuch 6y ago
  > Companies can achieve great benefit by externalizing cost on society, but should they? Yes, indeed they should. But the government also needs to claim taxes from companies to pay for these benefits. This concept is not even new, heck this is how most of Europe works.
  - mantas 6y ago
    Last time I checked, USA did have corporate tax. Just like we got in Europe.
    - pc86 6y ago
      Corporate income tax was just cut by 40% (from 35% to 21%). Almost 2.5% of the entire federal government's revenue.
      - mantas 6y ago
        So? It's not sky-high in Europe either. In my European country it's 15%, 5% for micro businesses.
  - nogabebop23 6y ago
    The entire point of identifying an externalized cost is that it is not being paid for by the beneficiary. You can't both allow it and have them pay for it or it's no longer externalized.

> If there was an alternative, higher wage they would pick that. This is the market labor cost. Cue the obligatory pedantic HN Econ 101 analysis. Actually, most interviews with Turks say the payment is less important than being able to do hits between classes, or without any commuting. Also, some workloads are done on Turk as carefully planned statistical trials, which cannot easily be done offline. So, nothing to do with HN Econ 101 today. Class is out.

MichaelGlass 6y ago

"below market" because Instacart (and uber, etc) forgo normal labor law, have by-default but not by-contract full-time workers without any full-time benefits. Companies can achieve great benefit by externalizing cost on society, but should they? (And should they be able to?) e.g. https://www.forbes.com/sites/ebauer/2019/12/16/is-uber-cheating-on-social-securityfica-taxes/#5289694a3ce4 https://www.forbes.com/sites/ebauer/2019/12/16/is-uber-cheat... https://www.forbes.com/sites/clareoconnor/2014/04/15/report-walmart-workers-cost-taxpayers-6-2-billion-in-public-assistance/#4e9896de720b https://www.forbes.com/sites/clareoconnor/2014/04/15/report-...

godzillabrennus 6y ago
Free market idealists think the market can determine the minimum wage without government or organized labor enforcing higher wages.
- brorfred 6y ago
  Free market idealists also tend to be very against the natural way for workers to consolidate and leverage negotiation power: trade unions.
  - black_puppydog 6y ago
    Yeah, I never understood how "free everything" advocates tend to be so much against the freedom of the individual to refer decisions/actions to a collective when that happens to be the better course of action.
    - D895n9o33436N42 6y ago
      “Free market” isn’t “free everything”. In a free market the bid-ask spread is king. It’s just another kind of tyranny, which, like all such things, benefits those who are set up to take advantage of it, and leaves most others in the dust.
    - floor2 6y ago
      Maybe your lack of understanding is because you're arguing against an imaginary straw man? A group forming a collective and negotiating as such fits perfectly fine with free market ideals. This exists in many forms that all manner of libertarian, free-market, whatever label people are OK with. When that group uses violence, threats and coercion to their benefit is where people object. Examples - blocking an employer from hiring non-union employees, harming or threatening to harm workers during a strike, forcing people to join a union to get/keep a job, preventing new workers or new firms from entering the market through regulation, etc. If you want to say "You can hire these 20 union workers at a rate of $$$, we all stand together" that's fine. When you say "You need to hire these 20 union workers, and if you don't, we'll surround your business and threaten, harass and intimidate the people you hire instead" is where you've jumped into violence and extortion rather than free market negotiation.
  - WoodenChair 6y ago
    I think people in this thread are confusing "free market idealists" (usually libertarians) with conservatives/Republicans. A free market idealist has no problem with a free labor market that self-organizes into unions as long as the government doesn't mandate unionization. Conservatives and Republicans tend to advocate for big business and have therefore a natural antipathy towards organized labor.
- specialist 6y ago
  The Freedom Markets™ faithful proclaim - efficient markets - rational actors - no transaction costs - power imbalances are moot Any notions otherwise are apostate and must be purged.
madsbuch 6y ago
> Companies can achieve great benefit by externalizing cost on society, but should they? Yes, indeed they should. But the government also needs to claim taxes from companies to pay for these benefits. This concept is not even new, heck this is how most of Europe works.
- mantas 6y ago
  Last time I checked, USA did have corporate tax. Just like we got in Europe.
  - pc86 6y ago
    Corporate income tax was just cut by 40% (from 35% to 21%). Almost 2.5% of the entire federal government's revenue.
    - mantas 6y ago
      So? It's not sky-high in Europe either. In my European country it's 15%, 5% for micro businesses.
- nogabebop23 6y ago
  The entire point of identifying an externalized cost is that it is not being paid for by the beneficiary. You can't both allow it and have them pay for it or it's no longer externalized.