5 ms·

Would you be better off if the rideshare jobs didn't exist? Is a bad gig job worse for you than no job at all? (If it is, then why are you doing it?) These ar

Would you be better off if the rideshare jobs didn't exist? Is a bad gig job worse for you than no job at all? (If it is, then why are you doing it?) These are serious questions, because rideshare jobs would not exist if you were compensated as a full-time employee with benefits. Uber and Lyft have never made a profit as it is, and increasing their costs would make the business simply impossible to sustain.

flangola7 4y ago
If the resources used to build Uber were put to better different use, then indeed it would certainly be better for the average worker. Even mediocre uses would be better than uses that specifically optimize exploitation and wealth extraction.
- twblalock 4y ago
  This is hand-wavy and assumes that investment in business is zero-sum. It's not, because our economy works on wealth creation not wealth extraction. The existence of Uber is not preventing anyone from investing in other things.
  - yamtaddle 4y ago
    I don't see how the post assumes that investment is zero-sum; to me it reads, rather, as assuming that capital isn't unlimited, which isn't the same thing. > It's not, because our economy works on wealth creation not wealth extraction. This can be true of the economy overall, but false of particular actors or actions within the economy, as in the case of rent-seeking, for example.
robotnikman 4y ago
As much as I loathe the current system, it is also true that treating drivers as full time employees is unsustainable for a company not even making a profit. Probably better for such opportunities in a gig economy to exist than not exist, but with how unsustainable the business is in general I can see it all collapsing at some point either way. How long can a company go without ever generating a profit?
ok_dad 4y ago
Ah so I guess it’s best to crush humans rather than have the business fail. Maybe we should, I don’t know, ensure there’s no need for these body and soul crushing labor for cheap? Support mass transit so you don’t need Uber, support those out of work so they don’t need Uber, and support the handicapped with local transit pickups friendly to them so they don’t need Uber. Then only the investors need Uber and they can make the business work or they can fail and it won’t become a massive crutch for our shit “free market” economy.
- twblalock 4y ago
  Who is being crushed? The drivers signed up for this. They could also get other jobs or collect unemployment. The people who decide that this work is better than doing that should be respected for their choices and we shouldn't try to take their incomes away by killing the companies they work for. To put it simply, taking peoples' income away by killing their employers does not help them; it hurts them.
  - ok_dad 4y ago
    This is just an old tired argument about the “free market” which absolutely does not exist for these folks. You’re simplifying this problem beyond recognition. It’s not so simple to do any of those things. I’m not even going to argue against it’s as you can literally find every argument for and against this ruling out there, again I’m not going to waste my time educating you. There isn’t much other option for these drivers and this ruling just lets them be taken advantage of more and more.
    - euos 4y ago
      To me your response sounds very much like "let them eat cake". Would they be better off without any job at all if those companies did not exist?
      - ok_dad 4y ago
        My response was targeted towards the discussion. There are things this country badly needs but putting paper over them via laws we cannot reverse is a bad idea. Just because you have a dumpster fire out back you have to deal with doesn’t mean you should bulldoze the building, and to me the codifying of contractors like this prop does is like a bulldozer versus waiting a while for the fire dept to come in the form of better worker rights.
ryandrake 4y ago
There are definitely jobs that exist, where society as a whole would be better off if the jobs didn't exist. Add up the negative externalities of a job: its environmental cost, its toll on mental/physical health, its promotion of harmful vices, its victimization of others, its criminality/illegality, and so on. Not saying ride share tips the scales either way, but there are scales and it's not always positive for all jobs.
- akprasad 4y ago
  Right -- a job can be both (1) exploitative and (2) better than nothing.
650REDHAIR 4y ago
The problem is we aren’t actual contractors. We are penalized for not accepting every ride. Accounts are suspended for repeatedly not driving to dangerous areas. There is no rate card based on time/miles so every ride is an arbitrary payout based on a black box algorithm. With Lyft you’re incentivized with streak bonuses for 3 consecutive rides. The 3rd ride is always an awful fare that will lose money and if you decline you lose the bonus for the first two rides. Ride cost has stayed the same for the passenger and payouts have plummeted for drivers. Anecdotal, but I’ve started gathering data to suggest that Uber/Lyft are capping wages to <$30/hr. When I have high tip passengers I am seemingly throttled with fewer requests and lower fares.
- ESTheComposer 4y ago
  > Accounts are suspended for repeatedly not driving to dangerous areas. Do you not see why this is a policy? If you're in SF for example and drivers refuse to pick up anyone from the Tenderloin, and the Tenderloin is predominately one race, it's easy to label Uber as perpetuating racism etc.
  - flavius29663 4y ago
    It's easy for us to comment on this, it's not us that need to go in there...
    - ESTheComposer 4y ago
      I lived next to it and had to walk through there all the time at night, so I'm pretty aware of the risks there, as well as the demographic. Uber would 100% get labeled racist if drivers never went there.
  - ceejayoz 4y ago
    > Do you not see why this is a policy? Yes, but the existence of policies like that are why folks say rideshare isn't a contracting scenario. https://www.irs.gov/businesses/small-businesses-self-employed/independent-contractor-defined https://www.irs.gov/businesses/small-businesses-self-employe... "You are not an independent contractor if you perform services that can be controlled by an employer (what will be done and how it will be done)."

flangola7 4y ago

If the resources used to build Uber were put to better different use, then indeed it would certainly be better for the average worker. Even mediocre uses would be better than uses that specifically optimize exploitation and wealth extraction.

twblalock 4y ago
This is hand-wavy and assumes that investment in business is zero-sum. It's not, because our economy works on wealth creation not wealth extraction. The existence of Uber is not preventing anyone from investing in other things.
- yamtaddle 4y ago
  I don't see how the post assumes that investment is zero-sum; to me it reads, rather, as assuming that capital isn't unlimited, which isn't the same thing. > It's not, because our economy works on wealth creation not wealth extraction. This can be true of the economy overall, but false of particular actors or actions within the economy, as in the case of rent-seeking, for example.

robotnikman 4y ago

As much as I loathe the current system, it is also true that treating drivers as full time employees is unsustainable for a company not even making a profit. Probably better for such opportunities in a gig economy to exist than not exist, but with how unsustainable the business is in general I can see it all collapsing at some point either way. How long can a company go without ever generating a profit?

ok_dad 4y ago

Ah so I guess it’s best to crush humans rather than have the business fail. Maybe we should, I don’t know, ensure there’s no need for these body and soul crushing labor for cheap? Support mass transit so you don’t need Uber, support those out of work so they don’t need Uber, and support the handicapped with local transit pickups friendly to them so they don’t need Uber. Then only the investors need Uber and they can make the business work or they can fail and it won’t become a massive crutch for our shit “free market” economy.

twblalock 4y ago
Who is being crushed? The drivers signed up for this. They could also get other jobs or collect unemployment. The people who decide that this work is better than doing that should be respected for their choices and we shouldn't try to take their incomes away by killing the companies they work for. To put it simply, taking peoples' income away by killing their employers does not help them; it hurts them.
- ok_dad 4y ago
  This is just an old tired argument about the “free market” which absolutely does not exist for these folks. You’re simplifying this problem beyond recognition. It’s not so simple to do any of those things. I’m not even going to argue against it’s as you can literally find every argument for and against this ruling out there, again I’m not going to waste my time educating you. There isn’t much other option for these drivers and this ruling just lets them be taken advantage of more and more.
  - euos 4y ago
    To me your response sounds very much like "let them eat cake". Would they be better off without any job at all if those companies did not exist?
    - ok_dad 4y ago
      My response was targeted towards the discussion. There are things this country badly needs but putting paper over them via laws we cannot reverse is a bad idea. Just because you have a dumpster fire out back you have to deal with doesn’t mean you should bulldoze the building, and to me the codifying of contractors like this prop does is like a bulldozer versus waiting a while for the fire dept to come in the form of better worker rights.

ryandrake 4y ago

There are definitely jobs that exist, where society as a whole would be better off if the jobs didn't exist. Add up the negative externalities of a job: its environmental cost, its toll on mental/physical health, its promotion of harmful vices, its victimization of others, its criminality/illegality, and so on. Not saying ride share tips the scales either way, but there are scales and it's not always positive for all jobs.

akprasad 4y ago
Right -- a job can be both (1) exploitative and (2) better than nothing.

650REDHAIR 4y ago

The problem is we aren’t actual contractors. We are penalized for not accepting every ride. Accounts are suspended for repeatedly not driving to dangerous areas. There is no rate card based on time/miles so every ride is an arbitrary payout based on a black box algorithm. With Lyft you’re incentivized with streak bonuses for 3 consecutive rides. The 3rd ride is always an awful fare that will lose money and if you decline you lose the bonus for the first two rides. Ride cost has stayed the same for the passenger and payouts have plummeted for drivers. Anecdotal, but I’ve started gathering data to suggest that Uber/Lyft are capping wages to <$30/hr. When I have high tip passengers I am seemingly throttled with fewer requests and lower fares.

ESTheComposer 4y ago
> Accounts are suspended for repeatedly not driving to dangerous areas. Do you not see why this is a policy? If you're in SF for example and drivers refuse to pick up anyone from the Tenderloin, and the Tenderloin is predominately one race, it's easy to label Uber as perpetuating racism etc.
- flavius29663 4y ago
  It's easy for us to comment on this, it's not us that need to go in there...
  - ESTheComposer 4y ago
    I lived next to it and had to walk through there all the time at night, so I'm pretty aware of the risks there, as well as the demographic. Uber would 100% get labeled racist if drivers never went there.
- ceejayoz 4y ago
  > Do you not see why this is a policy? Yes, but the existence of policies like that are why folks say rideshare isn't a contracting scenario. https://www.irs.gov/businesses/small-businesses-self-employed/independent-contractor-defined https://www.irs.gov/businesses/small-businesses-self-employe... "You are not an independent contractor if you perform services that can be controlled by an employer (what will be done and how it will be done)."