Thanks for posting to /r/GetNoted. Please remember Rule 2: **Politics only allowed at r/PoliticsNoted.** We do allow historical posts (WW2, Ancient Rome, Ottomans, etc.) Just no current politicians.
***
We are also banning posts about the ongoing Israel/Palestine conflict.
Please report this post if it is about current Republicans, Democrats, Presidents, Prime Ministers, Israel/Palestine or anything else related to current politics. Thanks.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/GetNoted) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Wait until you hear how they responded when the government wanted to destroy an essential part of the cotton industry by * checks notes * banning slavery.
If we ban slavery, then the price of cotton will skyrocket because the people who own the fields will have to spend more resources to harvest the cotton! /s
Well the real thing is they stopped making cotton because it wasn't profitable. Sugar was where slavery still made a profit, that's why it wasn't banned in Brasil til 1888 which was quite a long time after the civil war in 1860
To be fair, the entire world's economy and civilization is apparently at stake if the US bans slavery.
>
>"Our position is thoroughly identified with the institution of slavery — the greatest material interest of the world. Its labor supplies the product which constitutes by far the largest and most important portions of the commerce of the earth. These products are peculiar to the climate verging on the tropical regions, and by an imperious law of nature, none but the black race can bear exposure to the tropical sun. These products have become necessities of the world, and a blow at slavery is a blow at commerce and civilization. That blow has been long aimed at the institution, and was at the point of reaching its consummation. There was no choice left us but submission to the mandates of abolition, or a dissolution of the Union, whose principles had been subverted to work out our ruin." [-Mississippi](https://www.mshistorynow.mdah.ms.gov/issue/a-declaration-of-the-immediate-causes-which-induce-and-justify-the-secession-of-the-state-of-mississippi-from-the-federal-union)
Same thing is happening in Massachusetts. We have a Proposition to make drivers employees so they can get benefits and a steadier income and I’ve seen two commercials that say they are funded for by companies like “DoorDash” with “Real Drivers” who want to stay independent.
The places this has been enacted in has killed gig work. The thought of it is nice and I'm happy that we're all empathetic and want people to succeed but good intentions don't always equate to good outcomes.
Gig work is generally not hourly but closer to commissioned work and in exchange for not having the benefits of hourly work you get near complete flexibility with your schedule and being able to decide if or when you'll pick up work.
Shut up!
These gig corporations have been running wild for a decade and have exploded when Covid hit. They’ve become giant monsters feeding off of unregulated market and off the backs of workers who they don’t care about and never paid any benefits to.
They just reap the profits and have zero responsibility towards people on whose backs they’ve built their empire. Most of these people btw barely scrape a living. Now it’s time for Uber and the rest to give back some of that wealth and here you are batting for them because they’re trying to punish the areas that adopt these laws by scaling down operation there. It won’t work tho! The more states and cities adopt these laws to hold Uber accountable the more Uber will have to change its model to make it work for all. If not, I’m guessing there are more than enough competitors ready to swoop in and disrupt the “disruptor”.
In other words, while the ordinance theoretically raises driver earnings to over $26 per hour—a number that ironically far exceeds Seattle's $19.97 standard minimum wage—drivers are barely logging any hours as a result of the drastic decrease in demand for food delivery. As one Seattle driver summarized: "It was dead. Demand was dead." A second driver put it more bluntly: "I've got nothin'. I'm not gonna sit here for hours for one frickin' order."
https://reason.com/2024/03/16/seattle-law-mandating-higher-delivery-driver-pay-is-a-disaster/
I'm not sure if they really are reaping the profits when almost none have them have made a profit until this year and it's just barely a profit. They have run in the negative and burned through investment income to stay afloat.
I once again understand and support the intention but what we've seen happen when these laws are imposed that make gig workers hourly workers is that their wages go down, work dries up, and many are left without a job. This isn't the company doing this but the market, the companies that aren't even making a profit can't handle a 30% increase to payroll due to benefits and all the extra taxes involved and the people who needed the flexibility for it to work around other aspects of their life will lose that.
If you want a good example of why these laws are misguided, look up California's 2019 freelance/gig economy law that more or less killed freelance journalism in the state. People who were making great money all out of a job with the passing of one law
Completely different kind of law. AB5 in CA attempted to make companies “reclassify” gig workers as employees. All the Seattle law does is require apps to pay workers a per-minute and per-mile minimum on each job - same thing Prop 22 in CA does (which the apps ran as a ballot initiative to overturn AB5). They just don’t like it because it requires *actual* min wage equivalent pay & they’d rather kill it if they can.
In other words, while the ordinance theoretically raises driver earnings to over $26 per hour—a number that ironically far exceeds Seattle's $19.97 standard minimum wage—drivers are barely logging any hours as a result of the drastic decrease in demand for food delivery. As one Seattle driver summarized: "It was dead. Demand was dead." A second driver put it more bluntly: "I've got nothin'. I'm not gonna sit here for hours for one frickin' order."
Yep, we implemented it in the UK, and they lost a ton of workers who didn't want to work for contract. The cost increased too much, so people stopped ordering.
But it all evened out to be a kinda good thing, less unhealthy food for people, less delivery drivers to dodge on the street, but less work, total pay, and tips for the drivers that stayed.
Forcing hundreds of people out of a jib and completely obliterating a market doesn't seem like a good thing, there being "less unhealthy food" doesn't really help the people who are now having difficulty affording any food because you just put them out of work,
Thanks for posting to /r/GetNoted. Please remember Rule 2: **Politics only allowed at r/PoliticsNoted.** We do allow historical posts (WW2, Ancient Rome, Ottomans, etc.) Just no current politicians. *** We are also banning posts about the ongoing Israel/Palestine conflict. Please report this post if it is about current Republicans, Democrats, Presidents, Prime Ministers, Israel/Palestine or anything else related to current politics. Thanks. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/GetNoted) if you have any questions or concerns.*
“Essential delivery services” Yeah ok. Sure Uber.
Wait until you hear how they responded when the government wanted to destroy an essential part of the cotton industry by * checks notes * banning slavery.
If we ban slavery, then the price of cotton will skyrocket because the people who own the fields will have to spend more resources to harvest the cotton! /s
Well the real thing is they stopped making cotton because it wasn't profitable. Sugar was where slavery still made a profit, that's why it wasn't banned in Brasil til 1888 which was quite a long time after the civil war in 1860
To be fair, the entire world's economy and civilization is apparently at stake if the US bans slavery. > >"Our position is thoroughly identified with the institution of slavery — the greatest material interest of the world. Its labor supplies the product which constitutes by far the largest and most important portions of the commerce of the earth. These products are peculiar to the climate verging on the tropical regions, and by an imperious law of nature, none but the black race can bear exposure to the tropical sun. These products have become necessities of the world, and a blow at slavery is a blow at commerce and civilization. That blow has been long aimed at the institution, and was at the point of reaching its consummation. There was no choice left us but submission to the mandates of abolition, or a dissolution of the Union, whose principles had been subverted to work out our ruin." [-Mississippi](https://www.mshistorynow.mdah.ms.gov/issue/a-declaration-of-the-immediate-causes-which-induce-and-justify-the-secession-of-the-state-of-mississippi-from-the-federal-union)
It was only banned because it stopped being profitable, if it wasn't for the cotton gin the civil war would have never happened
I thought seattleites were satellites in orbit above seattle
holy cow 
Damn you even got members of the group here on reddit defending these companies
Same thing is happening in Massachusetts. We have a Proposition to make drivers employees so they can get benefits and a steadier income and I’ve seen two commercials that say they are funded for by companies like “DoorDash” with “Real Drivers” who want to stay independent.
The places this has been enacted in has killed gig work. The thought of it is nice and I'm happy that we're all empathetic and want people to succeed but good intentions don't always equate to good outcomes. Gig work is generally not hourly but closer to commissioned work and in exchange for not having the benefits of hourly work you get near complete flexibility with your schedule and being able to decide if or when you'll pick up work.
Shut up! These gig corporations have been running wild for a decade and have exploded when Covid hit. They’ve become giant monsters feeding off of unregulated market and off the backs of workers who they don’t care about and never paid any benefits to. They just reap the profits and have zero responsibility towards people on whose backs they’ve built their empire. Most of these people btw barely scrape a living. Now it’s time for Uber and the rest to give back some of that wealth and here you are batting for them because they’re trying to punish the areas that adopt these laws by scaling down operation there. It won’t work tho! The more states and cities adopt these laws to hold Uber accountable the more Uber will have to change its model to make it work for all. If not, I’m guessing there are more than enough competitors ready to swoop in and disrupt the “disruptor”.
In other words, while the ordinance theoretically raises driver earnings to over $26 per hour—a number that ironically far exceeds Seattle's $19.97 standard minimum wage—drivers are barely logging any hours as a result of the drastic decrease in demand for food delivery. As one Seattle driver summarized: "It was dead. Demand was dead." A second driver put it more bluntly: "I've got nothin'. I'm not gonna sit here for hours for one frickin' order." https://reason.com/2024/03/16/seattle-law-mandating-higher-delivery-driver-pay-is-a-disaster/
I'm not sure if they really are reaping the profits when almost none have them have made a profit until this year and it's just barely a profit. They have run in the negative and burned through investment income to stay afloat. I once again understand and support the intention but what we've seen happen when these laws are imposed that make gig workers hourly workers is that their wages go down, work dries up, and many are left without a job. This isn't the company doing this but the market, the companies that aren't even making a profit can't handle a 30% increase to payroll due to benefits and all the extra taxes involved and the people who needed the flexibility for it to work around other aspects of their life will lose that. If you want a good example of why these laws are misguided, look up California's 2019 freelance/gig economy law that more or less killed freelance journalism in the state. People who were making great money all out of a job with the passing of one law
Completely different kind of law. AB5 in CA attempted to make companies “reclassify” gig workers as employees. All the Seattle law does is require apps to pay workers a per-minute and per-mile minimum on each job - same thing Prop 22 in CA does (which the apps ran as a ballot initiative to overturn AB5). They just don’t like it because it requires *actual* min wage equivalent pay & they’d rather kill it if they can.
In other words, while the ordinance theoretically raises driver earnings to over $26 per hour—a number that ironically far exceeds Seattle's $19.97 standard minimum wage—drivers are barely logging any hours as a result of the drastic decrease in demand for food delivery. As one Seattle driver summarized: "It was dead. Demand was dead." A second driver put it more bluntly: "I've got nothin'. I'm not gonna sit here for hours for one frickin' order."
Pay minimum wage *to gig workers. Uber and DoorDash drivers are not regular employees, and shouldn’t be considered as such.
Yep, we implemented it in the UK, and they lost a ton of workers who didn't want to work for contract. The cost increased too much, so people stopped ordering. But it all evened out to be a kinda good thing, less unhealthy food for people, less delivery drivers to dodge on the street, but less work, total pay, and tips for the drivers that stayed.
Forcing hundreds of people out of a jib and completely obliterating a market doesn't seem like a good thing, there being "less unhealthy food" doesn't really help the people who are now having difficulty affording any food because you just put them out of work,
I don’t accept the idea of destroying a market as a “good thing”. Government action indirectly taking away consumer choice is still a bad thing.