This is a stupid argument. We're not talking about one driver, we're talking about possibly the same self-driving program in millions of cars. You ask millions of drivers if anyone has been in this position and you're going to get at least one. That's really all that matters.
I've lost control going walking speed, just because I was trying to get around a car going the other way and had to drive out of the ruts. Do that when it's slippery and your car slides sideways, not much you can do about it.
No, I'm saying the person should have been paid the going rate for a house cleaner, regardless of the fact that she was in a desperate situation. This person could easily afford it, and if $5 an hour was keeping her from starving, imagine what $20/hour would do. If this person couldn't afford it (which he could) then if we wanted to do something nice then he could have found someone who could afford it. But no, he stopped at exactly the point that *he* was happy and didn't go a step further. That's what made him selfish.
Fine, but then you're not paying them what they are worth to your business. You are paying them the minimum that you can get someone to fill that role for.
Then it's probably a good thing you don't care what people think of you. I'm going to assume this about you, since it's what people like you always say.
You're failing to take into account large changes that have happened since then, such as the ability to transport manufactured good over seas cheaply, globalization, and the fact that automation has never been so potent at replacing human workers as it is today. But ok, stay in your little dream world.
He was willfully ignoring the real value of her labor, and therefore taking advantage of her. You make it sound like charity, which cannot be so long as he is gaining an advantage from it.
Some nerds are capable of starting a profitable company by recognizing a need for their technical skills and marketing them, some aren't. You can't make a generalization like that.
That's one of those things that sounds like a good idea on the surface, but is really very skeezy for someone to actually do. I wouldn't expect many people would be able to reduce their self-respect to the point that they are a private grocery pimp.
If he's bringing in $500K per year of business, why shouldn't he get paid $100K? Just because there is someone who would do it for $10K? The problem is, there is a lot of talk about paying people what they are worth but it's really all just lip service. People get paid the least that companies can get away with paying them, which isn't anything CLOSE to 'what they are worth'.
Looking at it another way, if Instacart drivers are being paid next to nothing, then it shouldn't hurt Instacart for them to go on strike because they must generate very little of the company's worth.
Because things were good when the kids were born and no one has a fucking crystal ball? I mean I know you're trying to get at the whole 'you shouldn't have kids if you can't afford them' line but life just isn't that fucking simple for anyone.
I know someone who used to brag about how he had a lady who would clean his whole house, wash his dishes, do his laundry, for $5 an hour because she was an illegal alien and was basically desperate for money. Not surprisingly, most people upon hearing this did not rush out to get their own service slave. They just thought to themselves about what a sleaze this person was. That's basically what the gig economy is doing. Finding the people who are the most desperate and taking advantage of their situation. The fact that people are willing to do a job for a low rate does not mean it is right for you to perpetuate that situation. Just because you do it through a flashy app, it doesn't change anything.
What I wonder is if everyone went back to square one, how many of the business leaders of today would be industrious and creative enough to start something and become successful again? Without connections from family and social environment from birth, I think a lot of people who are 'successful' today would fall on their asses if they really had to depend on their wits to survive.
Not to mention the risk that you still might not find a job when you get there, but now you need a vehicle more because you live on the outskirts of some big city and now child care costs are through the roof because you just moved away from the few people who would provide free support.
If this job is paying what it's worth, then it shouldn't hurt Instacart at all for everyone to suddenly stop doing it. They are paying a pittance, so it's not that important to them if people do it, right?
If it's not worth much, then Instacart shouldn't feel it if all the drivers go on strike. In fact they probably shouldn't even offer driver positions because it's not important enough to them to pay anyone.
Still happiness / a comfortable living should be reasonably possible, without having to pay an unreasonable amount for tuition. Something that I think is sadly unattainable for many and getting more so by the day.
Slashdot Mirror
This is a stupid argument. We're not talking about one driver, we're talking about possibly the same self-driving program in millions of cars. You ask millions of drivers if anyone has been in this position and you're going to get at least one. That's really all that matters.
I've lost control going walking speed, just because I was trying to get around a car going the other way and had to drive out of the ruts. Do that when it's slippery and your car slides sideways, not much you can do about it.
No, I'm saying the person should have been paid the going rate for a house cleaner, regardless of the fact that she was in a desperate situation. This person could easily afford it, and if $5 an hour was keeping her from starving, imagine what $20/hour would do. If this person couldn't afford it (which he could) then if we wanted to do something nice then he could have found someone who could afford it. But no, he stopped at exactly the point that *he* was happy and didn't go a step further. That's what made him selfish.
Fine, but then you're not paying them what they are worth to your business. You are paying them the minimum that you can get someone to fill that role for.
Actually I have a friend who is from Africa, and they refer to each other as 'black' there too.
Then it's probably a good thing you don't care what people think of you. I'm going to assume this about you, since it's what people like you always say.
You're failing to take into account large changes that have happened since then, such as the ability to transport manufactured good over seas cheaply, globalization, and the fact that automation has never been so potent at replacing human workers as it is today. But ok, stay in your little dream world.
He was willfully ignoring the real value of her labor, and therefore taking advantage of her. You make it sound like charity, which cannot be so long as he is gaining an advantage from it.
Some nerds are capable of starting a profitable company by recognizing a need for their technical skills and marketing them, some aren't. You can't make a generalization like that.
That's one of those things that sounds like a good idea on the surface, but is really very skeezy for someone to actually do. I wouldn't expect many people would be able to reduce their self-respect to the point that they are a private grocery pimp.
No I mean you should get involved in the system, go work at a campaign office. Run for office yourself. Stop making excuses.
If he's bringing in $500K per year of business, why shouldn't he get paid $100K? Just because there is someone who would do it for $10K? The problem is, there is a lot of talk about paying people what they are worth but it's really all just lip service. People get paid the least that companies can get away with paying them, which isn't anything CLOSE to 'what they are worth'.
Looking at it another way, if Instacart drivers are being paid next to nothing, then it shouldn't hurt Instacart for them to go on strike because they must generate very little of the company's worth.
Because things were good when the kids were born and no one has a fucking crystal ball? I mean I know you're trying to get at the whole 'you shouldn't have kids if you can't afford them' line but life just isn't that fucking simple for anyone.
I know someone who used to brag about how he had a lady who would clean his whole house, wash his dishes, do his laundry, for $5 an hour because she was an illegal alien and was basically desperate for money. Not surprisingly, most people upon hearing this did not rush out to get their own service slave. They just thought to themselves about what a sleaze this person was. That's basically what the gig economy is doing. Finding the people who are the most desperate and taking advantage of their situation. The fact that people are willing to do a job for a low rate does not mean it is right for you to perpetuate that situation. Just because you do it through a flashy app, it doesn't change anything.
What I wonder is if everyone went back to square one, how many of the business leaders of today would be industrious and creative enough to start something and become successful again? Without connections from family and social environment from birth, I think a lot of people who are 'successful' today would fall on their asses if they really had to depend on their wits to survive.
Communist!!
Not to mention the risk that you still might not find a job when you get there, but now you need a vehicle more because you live on the outskirts of some big city and now child care costs are through the roof because you just moved away from the few people who would provide free support.
If this job is paying what it's worth, then it shouldn't hurt Instacart at all for everyone to suddenly stop doing it. They are paying a pittance, so it's not that important to them if people do it, right?
If it's not worth much, then Instacart shouldn't feel it if all the drivers go on strike. In fact they probably shouldn't even offer driver positions because it's not important enough to them to pay anyone.
Still happiness / a comfortable living should be reasonably possible, without having to pay an unreasonable amount for tuition. Something that I think is sadly unattainable for many and getting more so by the day.
MinerTime, an app that lets coal miners take part in the wonderful new brave digital world of the "innovative" gig economy.
Oh! Oh! Do they allow me to skip that expensive and bulky respirator so I can maximize my profits?
Funny, usually I hear people refer to it as 'market leverage'. I guess it depends whether over-corporate America loves you or not.
And I'm sure Instacart would NEVER exaggerate average income on their driver recruitment materials. \sarc
I think I'm sensing a good idea for an app. :-)
"Doh! Millionaire rock star was just below Instacart driver in the job listings! Why don't I ever follow through??"