News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

A comment on Uber loses licence to operate in London, will still operate while appealing. Parent comment

Re:Uber loses licence to operate in London, will still opera... by Crashbat on Monday November 25, 2019 @10:23AM (#21628846)
Except then you can't eat? It's not that it's not profitable, it's that the earnings drivers make are meager compared to what people need to sustain themselves. You make it sound like anybody who's on minimum wage just doesn't realise that they could go elsewhere for higher wages!
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Uber loses licence to operate in London, will still opera... by ekianjo on Monday November 25, 2019 @10:34AM (#21628959)
> Except then you can't eat?

In an era of record low unemployment (in the US at least), claiming that it's "Uber at low wages or you don't eat" is kind of a ridiculous hyperbole.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Uber loses licence to operate in London, will still opera... by lazyasciiart on Monday November 25, 2019 @01:27PM (#21631152)
Unemployment numbers aren't relevant when you're saying that people can ignore an entire class of jobs though. What percentage of those employed people are driving for Uber or equivalent and would love to get another job themselves? That's your employee competition pool.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Uber loses licence to operate in London, will still opera... by BurningFrog on Monday November 25, 2019 @10:32AM (#21628945)
Always fascinated by the idea that paying someone $8/h is a crime, but paying them $0/h is perfectly fine.

Such enormous cognitive dissonance. We humans are so good at that.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Uber loses licence to operate in London, will still opera... by lmm on Monday November 25, 2019 @02:55PM (#21632092)
Unemployed people have various forms of legal protection in place that "underemployed" people don't. You can claim unemployment because you were fired, but not because your hours were cut.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Uber loses licence to operate in London, will still opera... by RodoBobJon on Monday November 25, 2019 @11:26AM (#21629686)
The idea that minimum wages kills jobs is not as well supported as you might think. People commonly take overly-simplified econ 101 labor market theories as gospel when the empirical evidence about the effects of minimum wage increases is decidedly mixed: https://www.vox.com/future-perfect/2019/11/20/20952151/shoul...
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Uber loses licence to operate in London, will still opera... by BurningFrog on Monday November 25, 2019 @03:13PM (#21632282)
I'm not talking about that.

I just find it crazy that in the scenario where Uber pays someone poor $8/h while I pay them 0$/h, Uber is the bad guy, while I am completely blameless.

The only actor actually paying the poor person is somehow the problem!

It's hard for me to come up with a logical framework that supports that conclusion. So I think it's not actually a matter of logic.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Uber loses licence to operate in London, will still opera... by lazyasciiart on Monday November 25, 2019 @01:27PM (#21631158)
Paying someone $0 to work for you would be illegal too.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Uber loses licence to operate in London, will still opera... by WilliamEdward on Monday November 25, 2019 @01:57PM (#21631477)
What they're saying is that the worker either gets 8/hour with a job or 0/hour with no job. I'd rather have the job.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Uber loses licence to operate in London, will still opera... by lazyasciiart on Monday November 25, 2019 @03:50PM (#21632665)
And before it was illegal, people preferred for their five year olds to have the job too.
[ Parent | on HN ]