4 ms·

AB5 was one of the worst laws I've even seen written then to put icing on the case Uber&Lyft (the ones who there were trying to target) got themselves an except

AB5 was one of the worst laws I've even seen written then to put icing on the case Uber&Lyft (the ones who there were trying to target) got themselves an exception by going straight to the voters (prop 22) so everyone else needs to deal with the fallout of a shitty law except the target. The state should work to move benefits away from the employer employee relationship rather then make damn sure you need to work until you die to keep benefits. In a lot of ways it really feels like CA is just trying to offload their job onto private companies.

lotsofpulp 4y ago
> The state should work to move benefits away from the employer employee relationship rather then make damn sure you need to work until you die to keep benefits. In a lot of ways it really feels like CA is just trying to offload their job onto private companies. Almost every society wide issue in the US follows the same formula because voters will always vote for lower taxes and this can be done by outsourcing the obligation to non governments and/or means testing it so certain portions of the population benefit and others do not. And then you play politics with it for the next 50 years because any solution will have to take from one portion of the population to give to another. A universal benefit from the beginning would be ideal and avoid all this, but is politically impossible because the politician proposing it will never be elected due to higher taxes now. Education, healthcare, quality of life at work, etc.
- throwaway0a5e 4y ago
  >And then you play politics with it for the next 50 years because any solution will have to take from one portion of the population to give to another. Moving things to the "government" bucket doesn't in any way solve this. Try and cut something from the defense budget if you don't believe me.
  - lotsofpulp 4y ago
    Is the defense budget not an example of what I am referring to? All the politicians in the areas benefiting from the “defense” spending will make it a priority to prevent cuts in their region, which taken together, is basically everywhere in the US so all the politicians are in aligned. Society wide benefits are have to be addressed by the government. That is the whole point of the government.
mchusma 4y ago
I agree. We keep trying to cram things into the employee "bundle" which is just dumb. Want everyone to have healthcare? Just focus on that directly. Don't want people earning less than X per hour? Do that. Almost any attempt by the government to legislate by creating these "bundles" like "are they or are they not an employee" is a dumb waste of time and resources.

lotsofpulp 4y ago

> The state should work to move benefits away from the employer employee relationship rather then make damn sure you need to work until you die to keep benefits. In a lot of ways it really feels like CA is just trying to offload their job onto private companies. Almost every society wide issue in the US follows the same formula because voters will always vote for lower taxes and this can be done by outsourcing the obligation to non governments and/or means testing it so certain portions of the population benefit and others do not. And then you play politics with it for the next 50 years because any solution will have to take from one portion of the population to give to another. A universal benefit from the beginning would be ideal and avoid all this, but is politically impossible because the politician proposing it will never be elected due to higher taxes now. Education, healthcare, quality of life at work, etc.

throwaway0a5e 4y ago
>And then you play politics with it for the next 50 years because any solution will have to take from one portion of the population to give to another. Moving things to the "government" bucket doesn't in any way solve this. Try and cut something from the defense budget if you don't believe me.
- lotsofpulp 4y ago
  Is the defense budget not an example of what I am referring to? All the politicians in the areas benefiting from the “defense” spending will make it a priority to prevent cuts in their region, which taken together, is basically everywhere in the US so all the politicians are in aligned. Society wide benefits are have to be addressed by the government. That is the whole point of the government.

mchusma 4y ago

I agree. We keep trying to cram things into the employee "bundle" which is just dumb. Want everyone to have healthcare? Just focus on that directly. Don't want people earning less than X per hour? Do that. Almost any attempt by the government to legislate by creating these "bundles" like "are they or are they not an employee" is a dumb waste of time and resources.