Suburban moms are delivering groceries | Hacker News Reader

Suburban moms are delivering groceries

npr.org

50 pointshhs63 comments

Anecdotally, I've noticed this here on the central coast of California. We don't use Instacart or Uber Eats a lot, but when we do, its usually delivered by women/moms in their 40s or 50s (as this article points out).

I will point out one thing I haven't seen mentioned yet: despite the gig economy's downsides, doing this is probably better than getting sucked into the pyramid schemes and MLMs which tend to prey on the same demographic.

I spoke to one such mom, asking her why she doesn't do Uber or Lyft instead, and she said because kids make a mess in the car and she can't clean it every time before taking passengers.

I suppose that's a fair point but I've personally looked at that problem as an opportunity.

We rented out our house on AirBnB specifically so we could force ourselves to get organized and our kids clean their rooms.

My wife uses Shipt to order the groceries and in our neighborhood, anecdotally, most of the Shipt shoppers are suburban moms. We usually order our groceries about mid-day and they are delivered mid-afternoon. For a SAHM with kids in school this works out perfect as you can get a few hours of work in when you would otherwise be at home. Lots of women in my area (including my wife) are SAHMs.

Secondly I think moms are a good fit for Shipt shoppers. We had a lot of trouble in the beginning with shipt because the shoppers were young people not used to picking out produce and staples for a family. Over time I noticed more moms delivering our groceries and they seemed to get it right more often. Naturally they could guess what my wife wanted when substitutions were necessary or instructions were needed. They always ask first but sometimes you don't have time to text them back before they're done shopping. It's nice when they show up to the door and say "they didn't have ____, but I could see you're making chili, so I got you ____".

We order through a store and inexperienced shoppers are definitely a problem, not just produce but also picking the correct size of things ie cereal.

While I love living in California for various reasons (moving here from the East coast), I can’t help but wonder to what extent the gig economy is papering over the stupidity that is current housing policy, postponing the inevitable collapse until after far too many people have been consumed by innocently adding a “side hustle” or two trying to help make ends meet.

My own impression is that you likely think it's being "papered over" because you live in California. If you lived out here in flyover country you'd probably be able to see that for a lot of people, there has already been a collapse of the old economic order. Things for a lot of people right now are not all that great around where I live.

A lot of them would love to be able to deliver groceries. Even that in some areas would be too risky though with the opioid epidemic being what it is around here.

I’m not saying that things aren’t bad in a lot of places (I mentioned that I’m originally from the East coast, and have seen different status quos in different places), and I tried to be as non-proscriptive in my comment as possible. I was just struck because one of the main subjects lived in Sacramento, and I feel like a lot of these services are “homegrown” to the state.

I see what you are saying, but as far as I know this is happening everywhere. Jobs have centralized and you are paying a premium for the opportunity. Otherwise service jobs are mostly what is left. While these apps are less common we certainly have the same pattern all over Europe.

There's no papering over now. There may have been years ago. But there simply isn't enough to go around. Between 2011-2015 SJ added 500,000 jobs and built 65,000 housing units. Not even making a dent in the demand.

I think that's right, and it's compounded by the additional problems California creates such as occupational licensing hurdles. From the article:

> She worked as a therapist in other states, but a move to California required more classes and exams, right as her oldest was born.

That isn't a strictly California issue: I remember an article discussing the massive rise in licensing requirements from professional associations. It is in the nature of guilds, regardless of profession, to attempt to restrict growth in the number of practitioners. Link them up with state licensing authorities and you get situations like that. I think all such boards/requirements should be national: not sure what is magically unique about Californians' therapy requirements over any other state.

I think the while the article paints a picture of "choice" with the highlighted examples, there is probably a much darker reality of "suburban moms" having fallen out of job prospects and doing those gigs to make ends meet, akin to a minimal wage job.

In more prosperous times, suburban moms (and most people with regular gigs) wouldn't even think about "delivering groceries"...

The answer is in the first few paragraphs: they live beyond their means in a high income tax state, have 3 kids and farm animals, are addicted to consumerism - and want to participate without spending the little money they have.

It's also funny that she thinks she's not out spending money, when she is consuming fuel, wear and tear on the vehicle, and increasing risk of morbidity/mortality by driving around, also leading to more sitting.

I wouldn't begrudge her that hard for finding something that adds a little joy.

I don’t mean to begrudge, just pointing out that people don’t consider driving for 1 min costs them $0.60+ (prob $0.70 in CA) with a regular ICE vehicle. Plus the risk of being involved in a collision (greatest risk to one’s health that Americans face), plus of course pollution.

These externalities are never accounted for, and which lead our society to behave in suboptimal ways. Not to mention allowing all these on demand delivery and ride hailing tech companies to buy drivers at very low cost.

$.6 is average not marginal. The first mile (initial purchase) is half the cost.

My family went on a car trip that went from the Midwest to California and back. Compared to Oklahoma, California's fuel is about twice as expensive.

I'm going to guess that Cali's 1-minute cost is more around $1.

OK has such serious problems, though, not really a comparison.

That's the beauty of capitalism: the costs of production are externalized and so far-off or abstract that they cannot be immediately realized by the actor.

Buying gas for your vehicle is far off and abstract?

Do you think about the costs of production of oil, the refinement process, fuel delivery costs, wars in the middle east, and the environment/societal impacts of all of it each time you're at the pump? I doubt many people do.

> Do you think about the costs of production of oil, the refinement process, fuel delivery costs

These are internalized to the cost of fuel at the pump. There's no need or benefit to think about them as a consumer.

I do think about the subsidies for corn in 10% ethanol gas, and choose to purchase the gasoline with no ethanol because I don’t agree with corn subsidies. More and more gas stations around me offer a choice.

That’s about the only choice I get to make, though, short of buying a Tesla.

There’s a practical side to non-ethanol gas too: it’s much better on small engines like lawnmowers and generators. It’s in nearly every gas station here that’s remotely close to ATV trails.

They should be, but....it’s fairly obvious that they aren’t completely captured by the current price.

I read it as that she is aware that the driving is costing money as well but that at least this way she is spending someone else’s money to do shopping instead of her own money.

She specifically mentions factoring in her costs, and the comment that you cite was about the fact that she enjoys shopping but is spending other people's money.

I did misinterpret that. Oops! However, there is no way she’s profiting anything at $0.60 per mile reimbursement from Instacart.

If you already have a car, it only costs about 25cents/mile at the margin. Half the cost is just depreciation from buying it.

Most people in the US don’t have the option of going without a car, so you have to amortize the cost of obtaining a new vehicle over the total miles driven of current vehicle.

They do have an option, but they choose a lifestyle that consequently requires one.

You choose where you live. You choose what job you take. You choose to have children. Etc.

The cost is more than 25 cents/mile. There is a lot to factor in. Typically when you are a salaried employee and use your vehicle for business, this mileage allowance is on top of your pay. She is not earning anything other than what Instacart pays. By the time it's all said and done, she'll be lucky if to brake even. Maybe that's enough for her.

Here is what he IRS has determined the cost of driving is. I would imagine the costs in CA are greater due to gasoline prices, traffic, and general cost of living.

https://www.irs.gov/newsroom/irs-issues-standard-mileage-rat...

54.5 cents per mile The Internal Revenue Service (IRS) has issued the 2018 optional standard mileage rates and beginning on January 1, 2018, the standard mileage rates for the use of a car, van, pickup or panel truck will be: 54.5 cents per mile for business miles driven (up from 53.5 cents in 2017)Dec 14, 2017

Includes gas, oil, repairs, tires, insurance, registration fees, licenses, and depreciation (or lease payments) attributable to the portion of the total miles driven that are business miles.

> Includes gas, oil, repairs, tires, insurance, registration fees, licenses, and depreciation (or lease payments) attributable to the portion of the total miles driven that are business miles.

"Attributable to the portion" sounds like you divide it by total miles, which is going to give you a number that's bigger than marginal cost, and possibly a lot bigger. For some cars, doubling the miles might only increase non-fuel costs 20%.

I was thinking about this the other day. My Kia Optima tells me I’ve averaged 25mph over the last 120k miles. That means I’ve gotten about 4800 hours of life out of the car. If I take care of the car, I have an easy 3200 more hours. This would give me ~8000 operating hours. Acquisition was 15k$ (used) and yearly maintenance will probably average to ~100$/300hrs. So total life cost of the car will be ~18k$/8000hrs. That gives me an amortized cost of 2.25$/hour.

Mind you, I drive a lot of easy 55mph, in central Texas.

we should put hour meters on cars like we do on boats

My pickup truck has one, I was pleasantly-surprised to see it.

You're right though, all cars should have it. Cars idleing for hours puts wear-and-tear on the engine that isn't evident by the odometer.

The fact that she enjoys it gives me the thought that she does not enjoy what she was actually trained to do or went to school for. Honestly doing deliveries is easy and lazy work sure you walk around the market but I'd be more likely to think she could not work if she hadn't mentioned that fact. (Taking into account that she could be saying she likes it solely so in her mind it doesn't seen so bad to be doing..)

Nothing gets increased unless you think her customers just wouldn’t shop at all if it wasn’t for her, or would somehow do so in perfectly safe and carbon-neutral ways.

Regarding sitting, most that do this likely don't drive far from home base. Once at the store, they are on their feet shopping, and hustling while they do it. When they get to the destination, it involves carrying packages up multiple flights of stairs, sometimes more than once. Better than a desk job, no?

Your comment is extraordinarily cynical and judgmental, and seems completely detached from an observational article.

If you allow yourself to be profiled by a national publication, you're inviting people to be "judgemental".

And if you dispense such judgement on a public forum, you're inviting people to find it unfavorable. Detachment from the subject doesn't grant us the right to be assholes. Well I suppose we all have that right, but it doesn't blanket us from disagreement.

Thats needlessly accusatory. It seems they are the equivalent of (male) uber drivers and according to the article they get some extra income but not a lot.

>they live beyond their means in a high income tax state

Yeah how dare the poors live near me!/s

Living beyond your means doesn't mean you are poor, just that your current style of living cannot be supported by your current income.

If I moved into a 500k house and bought 2 new cars, I'd be beyond my means.

I have lots of coworkers who do just this. I would wager they are making less than me, yet have a bigger house and better car.

>I have lots of coworkers who do just this. I would wager they are making less than me, yet have a bigger house and better car.

Is this real? I can't for the life of me figure out if it's a trope or if it's actually the case. We try to keep housing under 20% of budget if possible. I just assume most other folks do as well, I am definitely speaking to the 500k and not the sub 150k housing scenarios since I understand at some point you have to live somewhere.

Though I guess that depends too, you can buy a 3-3.5k sq ft brand new house in the top school zones for 500k around here.

I'm sure those tropes are engrained is some truth. Like the "House Hunters" memes we hear.

Not really the vibe I got reading this. More like She wants to work but doesn't like the inflexible hours of her chosen profession so instead of doing nothing she does this which lets her be home when she needs to for the kids while still also making a bit of extra money to help with the family's finances. Nothing in this article indicates that the family has a problem with lavish spending or any other out of touch with reality problems.

I'm with you on this. I really don't like the 'gig-economy' being a replacement full-time job, but I can definitely see the advantages of it when you're at a loose-end and just want a bit of extra cash.

~ to when you decide you really should get off your ass and ebay off that stuff that's been sitting in the corner for a year.

Nothing in this article indicates that the family has a problem with lavish spending or any other out of touch with reality problems.

I agree with the GP. The following screams "out of touch with reality" to me: There are also four dogs, a bunny, a tortoise, chickens, ducks, goats and a not-so-miniature miniature pig named Squiggy.

Forget the rest of the menagerie, does a suburban family really need four dogs? Maybe they're raising the pig for an end-of-summer luau, but we don't usually eat dogs in the USA. So do they really need that many pets?

The great thing about living in a free society is choices. Some people might like to have 4 dogs in the same way someone else might want to have a swimming pool. To each their own and we should avoid passing value judgement on individual preferences when it has nothing to do with ourselves.

No doubt the HN crowd will not like a comment like that that is grounded in personal responsibility and planning. When did taking into account potential bad life occurrences and/or living beyond your means turn into sympathy for people who spend money on '2 masters degrees' but can't get employed with those because of life choices. And some other things 'prom dress' that honestly are not life essential (little things do add up; read further below)

And this:

> But now there's also soccer, swim team, lacrosse, broken cleats, a junior prom dress, trips to look at colleges, AP exams, SAT tests and summer camp.

How about not thinking that you have to do or supply all of that to your children to start. Here's an idea. Maybe it would be <i>more beneficial to your kids</i> if you say you can't pay for some of those things. That's right. Let them have a taste of what can happen if you don't think far enough in advance or make life choices with only a small safety net. That will certain be a motivating factor, right? Parents are brainwashed and lemmings to think they have to do things 'to show colleges you are well rounded' or 'because that's what parents do for their kids'. Maybe need to get back to think ahead and plan or you will end up delivering groceries to others as your job earning meager pay.

It occurs to me that such gigs may solve the isolation problem that people who work at home often report

After watching this from Vice https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L6eujSJ0-RU one of my takeaways is that it can be incredibly isolating and egodestroying to be a suburban stay-at-home parent.

What came up time and time again in the Vice video to me was that these women were often financially okay, but life in suburbia had left them socially isolated. The need for a social network that provided them with positive affirmation, even one that is as fake as a pyramid scheme's drove it. Some of the women in the video had even taken out rent on storefronts, or dedicated large portions of their homes as showrooms or for inventory, which has massive hidden (or not so hidden) costs associated with it.

I think this article adds some more color to the phenomenon. It describes people who again, aren't necessarily over extended, but are living pretty close to the line. Who don't want to give up suburban life and all the activities they want to provide their kids + bored housemoms during the day who can maybe make a few extra dollars putting their expensive SUVs to work doing menial tasks for other people instead of their own family.

I would be if all the costs and earning were added up, these women would be making less than minimum wage. Sitting around in an expensive car all day looking for gigs that pay $.60/mi + tip is terrible income. Her cost per hour for having the vehicle "employed" probably annihilates most of the "earnings" anyways, but she's not thinking of the deferred costs that will come later with higher maintenance. They describe a day as making $133 in 10 hours ($13.30/hr), but that includes the payment per delivery mile.

The real question to me is why aren't these women going to work in local businesses? If they're satisfied working gig jobs, why not go work at a local restaurant or as a bookkeeper or secretary at some local business? A quick side story, my brother works lots of odd jobs. He works these jobs because at some point those jobs, during certain conditions, offered some crazy payout per day (think thousands of dollars per day). He thinks (and there's no dissuading him from this) that if he can just get things lines up just right, he can tap into a mythical gravy train where this money is the normal payout for him. For example, he owns and stores a large snowplow and a very large expensive truck so that when it snows in the winter, he can grab a road clearing contract. In his mind, a few good snows and he's made his normal income for the year. He rarely gets on those contracts and his expenses far outweigh his earnings in terms of storage and maintenance costs on tens of thousands of dollars worth of equipment.

However, it's these prospective earnings that absolutely dominate his thinking, but his other earnings are so generally small.

I think it's the prospect of days like the best one described, where she made $21.25/hr which is around $44,200 year which, if the other person in the household is working for around $20k/yr puts them above median for the U.S. ($61,372/yr/household) which ain't terrible (I know the tech workers here are gasping at so little!) It's just too bad that these gig workers will probably make much less than that.

/rant on

   After watching this from Vice

I've watched my fair share of their journalisticish videos- they feel very one-sided and don't consider how damaging their coverage can be to their subjects- filming the faces of guerilla fighters in a third-world country seems to me like a really inconsiderate idea.

Sure, they cover things that no one else will, but they also cover things in a way that no one else does, either.

/rant off

>If they're satisfied working gig jobs, why not go work at a local restaurant or as a bookkeeper or secretary at some local business?

Most likely because either they have specific hours they can't work or the hours they can work are un-predictable. Businesses like workers who will work the same hours or work shifts on demand without question. And in this economy there are plenty of workers willing to do that. Businesses also outsource things a lot now to save money, a secretary may be a call center in India if they need one full time and their bookkeeper may be a guy in Florida.

You mention suburbia a lot. What do you think is different about life in suburbia compared to a city or rural area that makes life there any more isolating?

I don't know if its any more isolating in the general sense (I have my own anecdotes about all three kinds of places). But I think the phenomenon of these kinds of gig jobs being predominantly (or targeting) otherwise idle suburban house-wives is incredibly fascinating and seems to be digging at a deeper underlying phenomenon.

Maybe they're just targeting idle house-wives, and they happen to be often located in suburbia, but the suburban part is irrelevant?

I main-splain the reason why they're not 'picking up real jobs' as that those jobs come with commitments.

Even if it's not "you must work these hours" - it's "my books need to be ready at the end of the month".

I think maybe I can identify with your brother. In his "proxy-defense" - well even if I don't get that contract, I can stay in bed. I have a decently paying job and am eternally bemused by the fluctuations between "this is critical and I must work into the night and weekends" and the converse "I've been here all week and don't feel I've achieved anything of value"

When I idly consider the 'next step' for gig-work, it would be to break it out of the company domain/app. The article mentioned people with a bunch of T-shirts and their associated overhead of deciding which one to wear/app-to-load.

e.g. To take this to the logical extreme, you'd sign up with "goldcd-hustle", tell me what you were prepared to do, punch in your skills, upload your car details/overheads, tell me where you were with GPS blah blah. Then when you press the "I want to work" button, you'd get given the most beneficial job.

The problem with being an Uber driver is that it's all built around the best interests of Uber - and it's a piss-poor example of actual arbitrage.

"Instacart told NPR that more than 50% of people who shop for the app are women. DoorDash said women make up more than 50% of its "dashers" in rural and suburban areas and more than 60% in urban areas."

This ratio seems quite normal. Anyone knows how it compares to Uber/Lyft?

Reply on news.ycombinator.com