3 ms·

I don't think letting an adult drive an Uber around is like letting a 10 year old work a coal mine. I argued this law is a bad one, and your defending it by ar

I don't think letting an adult drive an Uber around is like letting a 10 year old work a coal mine. I argued this law is a bad one, and your defending it by arguing that we should have labor laws. I agree, I just think this law is a bad one. > This is a choice by the company. It isn't a requirement of the regulation. I'm not sure why 100% of the blame goes to the regulation and not the company that is actively adopting antiworker practices in response to legislation preventing them from continuing their previous antiworker practices. Should we instead blame the companies for being profit seeking? Should we enact laws not based on their consequences in the real world but instead based on the hypothetical world where all companies are run by mother Teresa? And this law does not make all workers better off. It makes some better off and other worse off. It takes away 70+% of flexible schedule jobs to increase the # of w-2 benefit jobs by what ~3%.

slg 4y ago
>I argued this law is a bad one, and your defending it by arguing that we should have labor laws. I agree, I just think this law is a bad one. Yes, because your argument is not specific to this law. For example: >And this law does not make all workers better off. It makes some better off and other worse off. I can't disagree with this. It is true. It is also true of the minimum wage. If you want to argue that these jobs are good for society, you need a stronger argument than people will work these jobs if they exist.
- JamesBarney 4y ago
  I think you must be responding to the wrong person because I never argued that these jobs were good for society because they existed. My argument is very simple. This law helps some people a little. Individuals working gig jobs 40 hours a week who are willing and able to work on a schedule. It also hurts other people a lot. Individuals who can't or don't want to work 40 hours a week on a schedule.

slg 4y ago

>I argued this law is a bad one, and your defending it by arguing that we should have labor laws. I agree, I just think this law is a bad one. Yes, because your argument is not specific to this law. For example: >And this law does not make all workers better off. It makes some better off and other worse off. I can't disagree with this. It is true. It is also true of the minimum wage. If you want to argue that these jobs are good for society, you need a stronger argument than people will work these jobs if they exist.

JamesBarney 4y ago
I think you must be responding to the wrong person because I never argued that these jobs were good for society because they existed. My argument is very simple. This law helps some people a little. Individuals working gig jobs 40 hours a week who are willing and able to work on a schedule. It also hurts other people a lot. Individuals who can't or don't want to work 40 hours a week on a schedule.