The Gig Economy

I recently moved to an area that has gotten a lot of tech bullsoykaf (scooters, delivery, bikeshares, etc.) With this comes the "gig" economy where people get paid to deliver soykaf for you or are hired for a simple one time job. I have concerns about this. In the US the only healthcare coverage you can get without getting gouged on the price is through an employer. Also there is no job security and no compensation for maintenance. And lastly the company can just dick you over as much as they want because you're not really an employee. However I believe it moves us away from a hierarchic society. There are still customers and workers but there is the ability for the expansion of this to better things. Small time restaurants or farmers markets can deliver local products and be family or neighborly business. Delivery is facilitated through a system with a set of standards defined and customers have a means to get in contact with people to buy from directly. The problem is I think it has benefits but am unsure if they outweigh the abuse this is going to create. Is it wrong to participate in this or not?

So, Seattle? If not then, at least here, I can probably name at least 10 food delivery services, 4 rideshare services, and a few other novelty services off the top of my head. Anyone can start their own little business and just about anyone can get started working. I think there is enough competition that some standard must be held, else workers switch to another service. Having fewer workers directly contributes to more inconvenience for the customer in this case, which contributes negatively to their reputation, so it's in their best interest to hold onto them. There's also the fact that this gig work is really just one step up from a cheap labor job. Most people doing it either can't get a job anywhere else or are doing it on the side. People in the former category probably receive some sort of government benefits and health care access, and people in the latter don't need it. A homeless dude told me he can get paid a bit to search out, return, and arrange bikes for one of the bikeshare services. It's possible that if a service became large enough, they could form some kind of employment program where if one had enough hours and experience you could be gain a permanent position. But in the end, a gig is a gig; the risk comes with the territory.

"One time gig" jobs aren't being "pushed" on anyone, per say. It is just that employers see it as more efficient and cost productive way of labor force. People that work on one time gigs have a reputation to uphold to keep working. People that work on part time or one time gigs are more efficient employers and cost them less money. What is solution you might ask? Alleviate some tax burdens from supply side of economics. Not for rich people, but for their businesses. This will incentivise more businesses to grow and employ. A lot of small businesses that actually want to employ more people and grow are actually eaither stagnating or slowing their growth due to healthcare costs. This will incentivise them to employ and to grow whilst at same time give more health insurance to people.

>Is it wrong to participate in this or not? try and twist it to your benefit, if you can't then avoid it. You should try and think through what you're doing and how it could work to your benefit more than whoever is employing you, it's like chess. You gotta think as many moves ahead as you can, then just follow your plan. The good thing about this "gig" stuff is that if it goes wrong you can just drop out and go somewhere else much easier and quicker than with the traditional model. obviously no job is great but you gottta evaluate your options and take the most beneficial pathway.

>>9692 > However I believe it moves us away from a hierarchic society. There are still customers and workers but there is the ability for the expansion of this to better things. Small time restaurants or farmers markets can deliver local products and be family or neighborly business. Delivery is facilitated through a system with a set of standards defined and customers have a means to get in contact with people to buy from directly. > Is it wrong to participate in this or not? I would argue, yes. Capitalism (the system itself) created the cyberpunk dystopia we live in today, and the system is inherently based upon exploitation. The poor saps who work the Gig Economy are exploited not only by the service they find the job through (which skims a little off the top), but also by you, since you are naturally negotiating to pay the least amount possible for the service they provided. >>9699 Pretty amazing how, despite coming to radically-different conclusions, we're both dissatisfied with the current state of affairs.

>Is it wrong to participate in this or not? this is a complex issue: on the one hand, you have to consider the profit margin. most corporations or "sharing" services are really only there to make money, and things like advertising and app driven profits can exceed the labor benefit of the actual task. on the other hand, tasks are getting accomplished. I would argue that a freelance economy where tasks are completed for money is good, but in the current state you are being pimped out by whatever share company you work for. Another factor to consider is that if everything becomes a one time task, and there are no inherent social benefits, you have become a biological machine. UBI may be relevant if humans could be replaced for ALL these kinds of jobs, but for the time being, I would say make more profit off of one time jobs than the company is making money off of you if you can. Otherwise, just do the same thing but by building a word of mouth reputation or working directly for a store/restaurant instead of delivering as part of a service.

>>9744 Its interesting to compare the so called gig economy to the dynamics of trade unions. They serve similar functions - i.e. to allow independent workers to act as a collective while maintaining a relatively high degree of autonomy. I wonder how a general purpose local delivery driver union would pan out. Could an app similar to uber be financed through union dues instead of third party profit? It seems to me that the existing taxi cab unions are in a great position to do something like this if they could only see the big picture and recognize that things aren't going to go back to how they used to be regardless of how much money they waste on lobbying. Obviously trade unions have their issues as well, but they seem to be a better foundation to build up from then silicon valley corporate middle men.

>>9748 at least trade unions are in some sense "owned" by the actual workers. They have elections and stuff, and they're not for-profit in principle.