6 ms·

The somewhat optimistic view of these "gigs" is that they have two important qualities: - They can be picked up/put down at any time - They require no specific

The somewhat optimistic view of these "gigs" is that they have two important qualities: - They can be picked up/put down at any time - They require no specific time commitment and can be managed in parallel with other money making endeavors/jobs Most "jobs" are actually difficult to get (go try to get a job as a waiter - you probably need to know someone), require a very specific time commitment, and if you decide you have other opportunities you want to pursue for any period of time you have "quit" the job and renounce the right to work it likely forever. Those are really shitty qualities! There's tremendous value in a job you know you can start/stop anytime and don't require any specific commitment in order to continue to have the job available to you. We should look at the gig economy not in any way as a career (although some may find it appropriate to use it as such) but rather as a new income generating tool. When considering whether the gig economy is good or bad, we should consider that context. My overall take is that we need more "gigs" but that the rate of the shift towards "gigs" in general is too fast and is worrying. I assume it will slow dramatically but if it doesn't...

nickthemagicman 9y ago
The problem is less with the qualities of the job and more with the pay of the job. It's poverty wages and exploitative. It's not profiting off these people, it's profiteering off of them.
- closeparen 9y ago
  In what ways do you think they would be better off if these companies were shut down?
  - WheelsAtLarge 9y ago
    No don't shut them down. Just make sure they're not jobs where people are struggling.
- mtsr 9y ago
  Indeed and additionally they're taking work away from people with previously reasonably paying work (cab drivers, etc). Some of these really are zero-sum games and the gig economy is destroying pay in these.
- atemerev 9y ago
  Low wages are the result of competition. If nearly everybody can be a waiter, and the demand is limited, there are two options: the salary would be very low, OR: there will be very few jobs (the imposed minimum salary case). This is mathematics, you can't change that. You can subsidize these low-income jobs, but this is expensive and unsustainable (by definition, there are a lot of low-income people who need to be subsidized). The only way out of the situation is to raise demand, and sharing economy does exactly that. In the days before (except maybe in the NYC), taxis were used relatively rarely; now, Uber is ubiquitous and used without hesitation in many places.
  - WheelsAtLarge 9y ago
    It's not a matter of subsidizing. We all need a base from where to work. There was a time when people worked 7 days a week, were forced to work over 40 hours a week without additional compensation, no vacations, no health insurance and work safety was iffy. Thanks to unions and an improving economy things changed. The gig economy is bringing some of us back to that. Where is the improvement we hoped tech was supposed to bring. We have a chance to make things better but we are not choosing to do it. Money is not everything. I know society is better when people are healthy and happy than when they are not. The gig economy is not helping society it's making life more difficult for those that have no choice on what job they can get.
    - atemerev 9y ago
      The "jobs" economy is over. It felt good while it lasted (about 140 years), when the economic output was mostly measured in material goods, and jobs were organized around large factories (either belonging to corporations, like in the US or Europe or Japan, or directly to the state, like in the USSR). Now in the post-industrial world, when the material goods production is mostly saturated, still believing that jobs can provide economic sustenance is about as realistic as believing that everybody can work as a farmer and live a good life producing food. Today in developed countries, only about 3% of population work as farmers. Soon, only about 3% of population will have jobs — the rest will have to do something else (like be employed in the sharing economy gigs). This is inevitable, and there is no way to reverse this. Government regulations can't do anything to oppose these immense natural forces, nor they will need to. Or rather there is a way to reverse the trend and provide the need for immense material economic output: a war. A world war — because warring parties quickly lose the economic edge in a peaceful economy, and it's either everyone's in, or nobody goes. There are no unemployed at wartime.
- tommynicholas 9y ago
  My biggest problem with Uber/Lyft is how the costs are incredibly obscure to the driver. I think that sucks. With Postmates, for example, a friend of mine was making $15 - $20 an hour riding his bike. That's ok money! Especially given the characteristics of the job I mentioned above. If he'd been driving a car, it's not really ok money. I'm eyes wide open about the downsides of many of these jobs, especially the ones that involve using your own car. I just want to mention the upside because it's important. It has helped a really save a few of my friends butts at really tough times in their lives. I don't want to lose site of that. Optionality is important.
taneq 9y ago
Automated marketplaces are generally really efficient, which means that they drive the end-user cost down until it meets the cost of supply (ie. they drive the profit for suppliers down to zero). This is what's happening with Uber, even with their subsidised ride prices. (And for a virtual example, this is what happened in the Diablo 3 auction house, and basically killed the 'grind bosses for upgrades' endgame until they removed it.)

nickthemagicman 9y ago

The problem is less with the qualities of the job and more with the pay of the job. It's poverty wages and exploitative. It's not profiting off these people, it's profiteering off of them.

closeparen 9y ago
In what ways do you think they would be better off if these companies were shut down?
- WheelsAtLarge 9y ago
  No don't shut them down. Just make sure they're not jobs where people are struggling.
mtsr 9y ago
Indeed and additionally they're taking work away from people with previously reasonably paying work (cab drivers, etc). Some of these really are zero-sum games and the gig economy is destroying pay in these.
atemerev 9y ago
Low wages are the result of competition. If nearly everybody can be a waiter, and the demand is limited, there are two options: the salary would be very low, OR: there will be very few jobs (the imposed minimum salary case). This is mathematics, you can't change that. You can subsidize these low-income jobs, but this is expensive and unsustainable (by definition, there are a lot of low-income people who need to be subsidized). The only way out of the situation is to raise demand, and sharing economy does exactly that. In the days before (except maybe in the NYC), taxis were used relatively rarely; now, Uber is ubiquitous and used without hesitation in many places.
- WheelsAtLarge 9y ago
  It's not a matter of subsidizing. We all need a base from where to work. There was a time when people worked 7 days a week, were forced to work over 40 hours a week without additional compensation, no vacations, no health insurance and work safety was iffy. Thanks to unions and an improving economy things changed. The gig economy is bringing some of us back to that. Where is the improvement we hoped tech was supposed to bring. We have a chance to make things better but we are not choosing to do it. Money is not everything. I know society is better when people are healthy and happy than when they are not. The gig economy is not helping society it's making life more difficult for those that have no choice on what job they can get.
  - atemerev 9y ago
    The "jobs" economy is over. It felt good while it lasted (about 140 years), when the economic output was mostly measured in material goods, and jobs were organized around large factories (either belonging to corporations, like in the US or Europe or Japan, or directly to the state, like in the USSR). Now in the post-industrial world, when the material goods production is mostly saturated, still believing that jobs can provide economic sustenance is about as realistic as believing that everybody can work as a farmer and live a good life producing food. Today in developed countries, only about 3% of population work as farmers. Soon, only about 3% of population will have jobs — the rest will have to do something else (like be employed in the sharing economy gigs). This is inevitable, and there is no way to reverse this. Government regulations can't do anything to oppose these immense natural forces, nor they will need to. Or rather there is a way to reverse the trend and provide the need for immense material economic output: a war. A world war — because warring parties quickly lose the economic edge in a peaceful economy, and it's either everyone's in, or nobody goes. There are no unemployed at wartime.
tommynicholas 9y ago
My biggest problem with Uber/Lyft is how the costs are incredibly obscure to the driver. I think that sucks. With Postmates, for example, a friend of mine was making $15 - $20 an hour riding his bike. That's ok money! Especially given the characteristics of the job I mentioned above. If he'd been driving a car, it's not really ok money. I'm eyes wide open about the downsides of many of these jobs, especially the ones that involve using your own car. I just want to mention the upside because it's important. It has helped a really save a few of my friends butts at really tough times in their lives. I don't want to lose site of that. Optionality is important.

taneq 9y ago

Automated marketplaces are generally really efficient, which means that they drive the end-user cost down until it meets the cost of supply (ie. they drive the profit for suppliers down to zero). This is what's happening with Uber, even with their subsidised ride prices. (And for a virtual example, this is what happened in the Diablo 3 auction house, and basically killed the 'grind bosses for upgrades' endgame until they removed it.)