Hacker News Reader

Comment by kryogen1c | Hacker News Reader

I don't understand this logic generally and in this case it makes even less sense. 10 years ago, Uber literally didn't exist. How, in any way, is Uber forcefully underpaying it's employees/contractors? People flocked to drive for Uber; where is the oppression here?

This is the same "Walmart doesn't pay its workers and destroys local businesses argument". People work there, and people shop there. Walmart didn't make anyone do anything, and neither does Uber.

In a free market, people do what is valuable to them. How can you say those people aren't? If it's not a free market, then how is it the corporations fault? Don't hate the player, hate the government.

View on HN

In a completely free market, corporations are free to distort economic and labour policy so that poor unemployed people are desperate to get any job they can, regardless of how poorly it pays.

This is why minimum wage and other laws exist.

See also: race to the bottom.

To add to this: if workers are underpaid relative to the cost of living in their area, they'll likely end up on some government assistance program.

Effectively, Walmart/Uber/etc get to double-dip -- they pay their employees less than a living wage, and based on the US tax structure, don't have to pay for the government assistance programs that their employees end up needing to make ends meet.

> To add to this: if workers are underpaid relative to the cost of living in their area, they'll likely end up on some government assistance program.

But that was already the situation before Uber came to the market? For all we know, driving Uber might have moved some of the people less dependent on the government assistance programs.

> This is why minimum wage and other laws exist.

This is not a settled question in economics. The idea that minimum wage laws help the poor is at the very least debatable.

I would be interested in a counterargument because I am having trouble coming up with one myself.

My opinion is that having a minimum wage influences people to not make their own target, since an authority figure essentially deemed one hour of work is worth X dollars. Removing the minimum wage would make workers think for themselves how much they should earn and I believe that inclusion in their earning process would lead them to plan better, work better, and therefore earn more.

Essentially, I believe that when the government thinks for the people like declaring a minimum wage the people tend to avoid thinking about it themselves.

Milton Friedman famously put forth an argument against minimum wage in his TV series Free to Choose:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x-BGi4NIFww

The Wikipedia article on minimum wage laws [0] has a pretty good overview of some of the most common arguments for and against. Really, though, the whole article is pretty interesting for a Wikipedia piece and illustrates the level of disagreement between economists over the effects these laws actually have.

0: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Minimum_wage#Debate_over_conse...

Some jobs are viable at $8 /hr but not $15 /hr so the business have to eliminate positions to stay solvent. That means someone who could have taken the lower paying job now has no job at all.

Also, inflation. When everyone is making at least $15 /hr then that $15 means less than it used to. All costs of goods go up to match the new supply of "wealth". Burger flippers make $15 /hr but burgers now cost $10.

In more meta terms: manipulating the market is never easy if it's possible to do successfully at all.

Free markets rely on educated consumers operating in a transparent market.

Ubers model works because they externalize a lot of operating costs to ignorant (under-informed) "contractors", and obscuring the economic realities from customers.

So I think it's fair to hate the player.

That's assuming there's an infinite supply of jobs.

When you're in financial difficulty - say your 0 hour contract doesn't bring enough money to pay the bills - you'll take whatever terms and conditions Uber is giving to you. Because you need to fulfill your basic needs.

I don't think that many Uber drivers are doing it by choice, they just don't talk about it to avoid bumming clients and getting a poor rating.

I'd like the slickness of the Uber app with a bit more ethics and I would be a good client.

> That's assuming there's an infinite supply of jobs.

Not only did I not assume that, the exact opposite is true.

Uber _just_ created all of their jobs; they didn't used to exist. Everyone started working there because they wanted to. It's valuable to them to spend their time driving. It's not like Uber forced closed other companies at a 1:1 ratio and force hired their workers for less.

These are all voluntary transactions.

If you're desperate you will "volunteer" to do certain things you don't want to do. That can be exploited.

Depends if it's a sellers' or buyers' market.

Would Uber drivers be better off today if Uber had never existed?

I mean, if you're a libertarian that makes sense. If you're not then wonder about why things like minimum wage exists, surely if people are willing to work for less than minimum wage why stop them?

Reply on news.ycombinator.com