4 ms·

Yeah, they can have no minimum wage because they have organized labor. But if you’re a 1099 for Uber and you attempt to organize a union, you’ll just get fired.

Yeah, they can have no minimum wage because they have organized labor. But if you’re a 1099 for Uber and you attempt to organize a union, you’ll just get fired. Without the ability to form a union, or wage protection, workers are going to be racing to the bottom.

jrowley 6y ago
Also in those developed countries without minimum wage, they have national healthcare. So a poor comparison in my opinion.
- deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]
virmundi 6y ago
If they don’t derive benefit, they wouldn’t work for Uber. There are other jobs available. Also we’ve stopped expecting people to move to find a better life.
virmundi 6y ago
You can make your own Uber. There is nothing stopping people from doing that. Lyft and Uber are all powered by VC money. There is nothing stopping a communalist approach to software and profit distribution.
- jrowley 6y ago
  I cannot “make my own Uber”. I don’t have a bottomless pit of Saudi Oil money to throw into this unprofitable space. The only people that have the money to compete have no desire to put workers first. They are just trying to establish a monopoly and drive existing, successful, more efficient and sustainable forms of transit out of business.
  - cbozeman 6y ago
    Yes you can. You don't want to. That's not the same thing. Its been my experience over the decades that when people say, "I can't do "x"", they really mean, "Doing "x" is going to be really, really hard and I don't want to work hard."
    - jrowley 6y ago
      First, I highly doubt any investors would be interested in yet another Uber/Lyft competitor with nothing to differentiate. They operate at billion dollar losses and just laid off a bunch of employees. It's just a race to who can drive prices lowest and establish a monopoly. Second, you're right in part, I don't want to build another uber, but not because its hard work (I like hard work). It's just that ethically Uber is pushing our country in the wrong direction, furthering our dependence on private individual transit, while further burdening the worker and the environment.
  - CountSessine 6y ago
    The barrier to entry for a taxi service, in a sensible jurisdiction, is very low - put a sign on your car and start driving people around. Uber and Lyft became so popular precisely because there are so many insensibly-regulated jurisdictions that made even this start-your-own-taxi-service illegal in order to create artificial scarcity. Highly-regulated medallion taxi services suck - both independent taxis as well as Uber are a threat to them because they're comprehensively better for customers. You literally have to legislate good service away for medallion taxis to work. And that's exactly what AB5 was.
    - jrowley 6y ago
      And I’d argue the barrier to entry for taxi businesses should be higher. More cars on the road doesn’t help the environment, or speed up anyone’s commute. Allowing Uber to circumvent this is moving our state in the wrong direction. And uber’s experience while better in some ways, is only better at the cost of the environment, and workers rights. If we don’t allow artificial scarcity/restrictions on number of cars on the road, maybe we should stop subsidizing fossil fuels too.

jrowley 6y ago

Also in those developed countries without minimum wage, they have national healthcare. So a poor comparison in my opinion.

deleted 6y ago
[deleted]

virmundi 6y ago

If they don’t derive benefit, they wouldn’t work for Uber. There are other jobs available. Also we’ve stopped expecting people to move to find a better life.

virmundi 6y ago

You can make your own Uber. There is nothing stopping people from doing that. Lyft and Uber are all powered by VC money. There is nothing stopping a communalist approach to software and profit distribution.

jrowley 6y ago
I cannot “make my own Uber”. I don’t have a bottomless pit of Saudi Oil money to throw into this unprofitable space. The only people that have the money to compete have no desire to put workers first. They are just trying to establish a monopoly and drive existing, successful, more efficient and sustainable forms of transit out of business.
- cbozeman 6y ago
  Yes you can. You don't want to. That's not the same thing. Its been my experience over the decades that when people say, "I can't do "x"", they really mean, "Doing "x" is going to be really, really hard and I don't want to work hard."
  - jrowley 6y ago
    First, I highly doubt any investors would be interested in yet another Uber/Lyft competitor with nothing to differentiate. They operate at billion dollar losses and just laid off a bunch of employees. It's just a race to who can drive prices lowest and establish a monopoly. Second, you're right in part, I don't want to build another uber, but not because its hard work (I like hard work). It's just that ethically Uber is pushing our country in the wrong direction, furthering our dependence on private individual transit, while further burdening the worker and the environment.
- CountSessine 6y ago
  The barrier to entry for a taxi service, in a sensible jurisdiction, is very low - put a sign on your car and start driving people around. Uber and Lyft became so popular precisely because there are so many insensibly-regulated jurisdictions that made even this start-your-own-taxi-service illegal in order to create artificial scarcity. Highly-regulated medallion taxi services suck - both independent taxis as well as Uber are a threat to them because they're comprehensively better for customers. You literally have to legislate good service away for medallion taxis to work. And that's exactly what AB5 was.
  - jrowley 6y ago
    And I’d argue the barrier to entry for taxi businesses should be higher. More cars on the road doesn’t help the environment, or speed up anyone’s commute. Allowing Uber to circumvent this is moving our state in the wrong direction. And uber’s experience while better in some ways, is only better at the cost of the environment, and workers rights. If we don’t allow artificial scarcity/restrictions on number of cars on the road, maybe we should stop subsidizing fossil fuels too.