Uber will charge significantly more per trip as new Seattle law goes into effect

Re:Uber will charge significantly more per trip as new Seatt... by Barrin92 on Wednesday December 30, 2020 @09:27PM (#25588925)

>, then it should be society as a whole that bares that burden, not just the enterprises that employ low/no skill labor or their consumers.

society as a whole already does that, as do other employers, who generally do cover healthcare, invest in the training of their workforce and so on, it's Uber and other 'gig economy' companies which by means of legal arbitrage are the exception.

And while it's fair to talk about the trade-offs between small, family scale businesses and minimum wage, last time I checked Uber did not exactly fall into that category.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Uber will charge significantly more per trip as new Seatt... by scarface74 on Thursday December 31, 2020 @01:20AM (#25590101)

Why are employers covering healthcare at all? This also shouldn’t be the purview of private companies.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Uber will charge significantly more per trip as new Seatt... by throwaway201103 on Thursday December 31, 2020 @01:52AM (#25590243)

WWII-era wage controls meant to combat inflation. Employers sidestepped them by offering other benefits to attract employees. Health insurance was a big one. It became entrenched and we're still stuck with it today.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Uber will charge significantly more per trip as new Seatt... by rrrrrrrrrrrryan on Thursday December 31, 2020 @01:50PM (#25595733)

With economic policy, I sometimes wonder if artificial floors tend to cause less strange distortions than artificial ceilings, because there's usually already a floor: zero. We just raise it a bit.

I feel like it's easier to anticipate the side effects of raising a minimum wage than it is for an earnings cap.

[ Parent | on HN ]