Elizabeth Warren is on the attack.
She is furious with Uber and Lyft, two companies that not only provide fast, cheap transportation for the masses, but also provide an opportunity for millions to shed their cars, reducing traffic congestion and greenhouse gasses.
Even though these companies tend to provide second part-time jobs, she expects Uber and Lyft to pay employee health care benefits.
It’s not fair to the taxis, whines Warren who never bothered to realize the massive benefit to millions of poor inner city residents who cannot afford a car.
Is Warren a clueless Luddite or does she simply belong in France longing for the French-style protections (with more than double the US unemployment rate as a “benefit”)?
Please consider Elizabeth Warren slams Uber and Lyft.
Companies powering the “gig economy” such as Uber and Lyft are facing a rough ride in Washington after Senator Elizabeth Warren, a liberal firebrand, accused them of undermining economic security.
“The much-touted virtues of flexibility, independence and creativity offered by gig work might be true for some workers under some conditions,” Ms Warren said in a speech in Washington on Thursday.
“[But] for many, the gig economy is simply the next step in a losing effort to build some economic security in a world where all the benefits are floating to the top 10 per cent.”
Ms Warren said the US was suffering from an “outdated employee benefits model” that made it hard for temporary and contract workers in the tech sector and beyond to build any personal economic security.
Dear Ms. Warren
Dear Ms. Warren, please think. France has among the strongest worker protection laws in Europe and its economy is struggling because of it.
When businesses cannot fire workers, they won’t hire them in the first place.
Uber is a godsend to millions of inner-city workers who use to have to pay exorbitant taxi fares if buses did not go where they need to go.
Everyone benefits from Uber and lift except the extremely small percentage of people driving taxis.
Outdated Model
Those looking for an “outdated model” need look no further than France and the popularity of French president Francois Hollande.
We do not have economic security because socialist illiterates started countless affordable housing programs that failed, and countless education policies that drove up the cost of education.
Obamacare is icing on a cake named “stupid”. Obamacare’s socialist redistribution madness is rife with canceled policies, reduced benefits, and rising costs.
To be fair, I also need to include in that list of things causing economic insecurity, the rampant warmongering and excessive military spending by both political parties.
Of course, the Fed, the Fed’s inflationist policies, and fractional reserve lending are the driver for much of this madness.
Uber Irony
The irony in Warren’s nonsensical rant is Uber drivers will cease to exist altogether in the not so distant future.
Uber tests 1st self-driving car in Pittsburgh
Please consider Uber Tests 1st Self-Driving Car in Pittsburgh.
Uber is testing its first prototype of a self-driving car on the streets of Pittsburgh, the ride-hailing company said Thursday.
In a blog post, the company says it has equipped its Advanced Technologies Center in the U.S. city with its first driverless vehicle, a modified Ford Fusion with radar, laser scanners and high-resolution cameras attached to the roof.
The vehicle in question still has a human behind the wheel during testing. The company says it’s still in the early stages of its self-driving tests and needs to make sure the technology is safe.
Uber picked Pittsburgh because of its “wide variety of road types, traffic patterns and weather conditions.”
Uber is in a pack of automotive and technology companies rushing to bring autonomous vehicles from conception to reality. Although it calls itself a technology company, Uber’s core business turns ordinary drivers into de facto taxi drivers who can give people rides in 450 cities worldwide.
“In the future we believe this technology will mean less congestion, more affordable and accessible transportation, and far fewer lives lost in car accidents.”
Precisely.
For the French reaction to Uber, please see French Taxi Drivers Burn Tires Block Airports in Mass 24-Hour Strike; 20% of French Flights Cancelled.
Instead of acting like a Luddite or a French socialist, it would do Warren some good if she would shut her mouth and think for a change.
Mike “Mish” Shedlock.
I wonder how many of the “10%” that Warren assumes benefits, come from overpaid government sectors or hangers on?
All of it!
So what’s Lizzie Borden…er….Warren gonna do with Uber and Lyft start using
those fully automated, self-driving auto-taxis?
Mish! Don’t encourage the glo-bull warmers! Greenhouse gases?! I know you know that’s a scam.
yes it’s a scam – but something come along they should cheer about and they bitch
The only reply to Warren is to call her Fauxcahontas. Or perhaps Liawatha.
Please send this to her and ask for a response. Ken
Warren is just a shill protecting the taxi medallion racket (a source of gov income). If I want to be a gigger and work for Uber and pay my own health care costs, then I should have the FREEDOM to do so. Simple as that. This is All About Individual Freedom of Choice.
Warren can have her freedom to abort, and I should have my freedom to drive for whomever I want at whatever terms are agreed upon. It is nobody else’s business. Should not be the government’s business how I handle my health care, either. These theoretical arguments justifying total state control are “progressive” garbage that even the old-time communists of the USSR and Eastern Europe recognize as obsolete and wrong (failures in practice).
Uber workers are classified as self-employed and not eligible for government benefits, simple as that. Some taxi drivers moonlight as Uber drivers, as it can be worth several hundred dollars a day, even more than being a taxi driver hack working for the owner of a medallion (crony capitalist). Unless you own a taxi medallion, taxi drivers are likely independent contractors surviving on tips. Warren’s version of the worker’s paradise keeps the crony capitalist taxi medallion system as a source of government revenues by outlawing the competition (removing their competitive advantage by government fiat). Not unexpected from a “progressive” worshiper of the police state (NSA, TSA, etc.). The real tangible benefits of Uber are far greater than the theoretical losses posited in the comments.
Nobody has any right to participate an an ILLEGAL LIVERY FOR-HIRE SERVICE and both Uber and Lyft are exactly that and should either come under standard TAXI REGULATIONS or be totally shut down as is the case now in many areas around the country.
agree self employed people work for whatever they can negotiate. If they can’t earn a living they are in the wrong line of work. Perhaps they need to become employees. Or go to school and learn a new trade.
The same logic holds true for employers. If they can’t remain in business and pay a living wage at the same time, then they are either incompetent managers or selling what nobody would otherwise want. They feel government benefits subsidizing their low wages are an entitlement and they are victims if these entitlements are removed. If their wages are so low that the employee needs food stamps and more taxpayer support just to live a basic life, then I would call this form of employer a public parasite with a great victim act.
Warren, Hillary, Feinstein, Boxer et al and most Republicans have become irrelevant in todays modern world-they are old and in the way-Dinosaurs who should move aside and let the mammals in-before the become fossils
I sometimes wonder about you Mish, you sound like a typical Neoliberal hack who pontificates on the finer points of corporate fascism whilst attacking those institutions who would defend against it. I admire your work most of the time because of it’s factual content and insightful economic dialogue. On this occasion however, you strike me as being a supporter of the very policies that have destroyed the common man’s struggle against the excess’s of capital greed, surely you’re not an advocate of putting profit above all other social and ecological considerations no matter the cost to humanity or the environment?
I, too, disagree with some points in some main posts on occasion. Anyone who agrees with someone all the time has a problem.
What struck me today is a little different. Warren is pontificating against free riders, as in have the government pay for what private industry won’t pay for, all the while it waves the flag and pontificates about free markets. Uber drivers have to go to the hospital as often as everyone else does and if they can’t pay for it, everybody else pays for them. This is no different than demanding government benefits subsidize low paid employees who receive a minimum wage that does not cover basic living necessities.
Warren is more Republican than most card carrying republicans in this way since she wants government spending to go down by eliminating free riders. Most traditional republicans who pound away on free markets are really big spenders who want the government to use borrowed money to subsidize their business friends, and thus emulated Democrats more than most real Democrats..
As always, the solution is more taxes on more people and the continued insistence on inflation as the solution to the inability of government to provide where competition does not provide. By all means, lets raise costs through enforcing government overhead and raising minimum wages to an “acceptable” level. Once those wages and costs are in place we will suddenly again find ourselves falling short as everything we purchase will again cost more. We see government increasingly failing to provide what it so generously promises at the cost to everyone daring to labor, government officials screaming for more everyday, and yet we see their “take” from taxpayers adding up to more there ever in history. So yes, the answer most definitely is MORE of what already graces us now. It’s working SO well.
“What struck me today is a little different. Warren is pontificating against free riders, as in have the government pay for what private industry won’t pay for, all the while it waves the flag and pontificates about free markets.”
Why should private industry be paying for it in the first place? That is the real question. If the value of a never worked before in any job, hamburger flipper, is $5.97 an hour, why should private industry be paying $15 and benefits on top of that?
How is Warren pontificating against free riders, when she wants people to receive from private industry, more than what a job may be valued at in a free market?
Ron J – It’s obvious.
Assume someone is paid $2.50 an hour because the employer can do it. Food Stamps and whatever else is provided via govt assistance comes out of YOUR pocket via taxes or via your share of the national debt. YOU are subsidizing the low paying employer. You are the sucker. The employer is the free rider. Mish and many others have no problem subsidizing the free rider.
What a bunch of bullshit.
People would not taker $2.50 an hour jobs.
And when it comes to minimum wage jobs, many people wont take them precisely because there are too many handouts.
We have had massive expansion of fast food places, walmarts etc. because labor costs were reasonable. In effect you are saying you would rather have the gov’t pick up all of the tab than none of it, if these workers were not employed at all.
mishgea – No, I want employers to pay their full share so govt handouts are not necessary. Those who hate minimum wage laws implicitly expect govt to support employees to the extent wages don’t. Hence low paying employers who are Free riders. Plus lots of excuses supporting free riders by many who misunderstanding my simple english. I don’t understand the contradiction from conservatives who want to cut govt spending on wasteful entitlements but support wages so low that entitlements are needed to prevent dystopia.
If they pay “their fair share” there will be less of them employed. And of course there is a question of who gets to determine “fair share”.
You, me Elizabeth Warren?
The only reasonable way to settle “fair share” is what the free market would decide.
perhaps those who hate minimum wage laws are really pro-dystopia only they don’t have the courage to promote it?
Folks let their ideology get in the way of reality. The Great Depression is an example. Hoover thought the Free Market (Blessed Be His Name) should be responsible for wringing out the excesses and putting people back to work at whatever level It chose.
Real humans, who suffered under that policy, decided differently and put in FDR. FDR put in price controls, guaranteed jobs, Social Security, the 40 hour work week and just about every other liberal program in existence today. Because of that, liberal Democrats controlled the federal government for the next 50 years.
Why? Because the Free Market (Blessed Be His Name) isn’t a real thing that is of value to the real world. All markets are controlled by a handful of powerful individuals who distort it for their personal gain.
However, unfortunately many, many folks have been lead to believe in the Almighty Free Market.
“Fair” is always a political calculation. Move to far in one direction away from it for enough people, and it will move too far in the other direction. So consideration ought be given on the effects of any given policy on everyone, with some consideration of amelioration on those who will bear the brunt of the pain. Otherwise, it might be you feeling the pain.
mishgea – To an extent the free market DID speak up, just not in the way you wanted. It said something you didn’t like. It said “Govt… make them pay me more so I don’t need so many food stamps any more.” The free market will decide the fallout or the fix. Perhaps the perfect competition theorists will win and the adjustment will be at the econ 101 level of simplicity. Or the invisible hand will move in many directions and ultimately ‘society’ will be better off by means that are too diverse to comprehend at an econ 101 level .. in other words it was a good idea.
Politicians passing wages hikes is not the free market
There is a flaw in your logic.
To see this, lets assume the gov’t benefits for an unemployed/welfare person are $1000 a month.
The Uber driver starts off unemployed/welfare so they are getting 100% of their benefits from the gov’t now (you/me) or $1000. For this they are doing nothing (no productive work).
They take a $5 an hour job driving for Uber and part time for 20 hrs a week. That’s a 100 a week or 400 a month (using 4 week months to simplify example). As you noted that’s not enough to live on so they get a $600 subsidy from the govt (you/me).
So in reality Uber has REDUCED the cost to you/me by 400 a month. Not only that, but the person is also doing 80 hrs of productive work!
As tax payers we should all get down on our knees and give thanks to the deity of our choice.
Note: The govt could in effect do the same thing Uber is doing by mandating welfare/unemployed people do some menial job for X number of hours a week to get their benefits (something many people wish would happen). Instead once again private businesses solved this by creating things like Uber.
They take a $5 an hour job driving for Uber and part time for 20 hrs a week. That’s a 100 a week or 400 a month (using 4 week months to simplify example). As you noted that’s not enough to live on so they get a $600 subsidy from the govt (you/me).
So in reality Uber has REDUCED the cost to you/me by 400 a month. Not only that, but the person is also doing 80 hrs of productive work!
Precisely
We should praise Uber for providing jobs – even though those jobs will vanish five years from now. But in the wake will be lower costs for everyone.
Uber is a benefit no matter how one slices it.
Mish
Texas Tim – your argument is ridiculous. Take a destitute person on the govt dole and pay them $1/hr. You have not improved their lot. You are exploiting a destitute person and using Uncle Sam as a free rider. Give them schooling and a job listing and a decent wage as a goal for doing well and then they win and Uncle Sam wins. Nobody cares about you.
First of all they aren’t being exploited. They are freely choosing to do the job. They can just as freely choose not to do it and stay home and collect UI/Welfare. If they take the job they must believe it’s in their best interests to do so otherwise why would they take the job?
Second of all why should I or anyone else GIVE someone schooling/job/decent wage. You earn what you get, it’s not supposed to be given to you. Things that are given to people tend not to be valued anywhere near as high as things earned (I thought my dad should GIVE me a car when I turned 16. He just laughed. Instead I got a job and bought my own. One that I took very good care of because I knew how much effort it required to get).
One thing often missing in political discussions: that most of the problems in a society are byproducts of governmental attempts to shape the society to promote the survival of the government. If government actually fixed problems instead of creating them it would soon become unnecessary
Terry Pratchett’s quote is a great description of the modus operandi of government since it always seeks to create its concept of order which causes more disorder.
Oops, the quote:
“Chaos is found in greatest abundance wherever order is being sought. It always defeats order, because it is better organized.”
“Folks let their ideology get in the way of reality. The Great Depression is an example. Hoover thought the Free Market (Blessed Be His Name)…” Jon Sellers.
You are the prime example, Mr. Sellers. You may make a lot of money and have a comfy job, but you are certainly mixing fantasy into your history. There are a lot of myths about the Great Depression, Hoover, and FDR. Hoover was a great philanthropist, used his own money to feed the Russian people after famine hit. Did not matter to him if they were Bolshevik or not. Hoover called all the industrialists to the White House in 1930, and had them all raise their wages. Most famously, Henry Ford doubled worker wages at the height of the Depression in response to Hoover; on the theory that higher wages would stimulate the economy by giving the workers more money. Worked for Ford’s workers because of the automated assembly lines and Model T dominance, but not for most of the rest of the businesses in the USA. Most businesses had to cut down on the number of employees to pay the higher wages, and could not hire more to expand at the new higher wages. That is the real history. Part of the reason the job losses persisted for the better part of a decade. James Grant gives a good comparison of 1929 and 1921, the long versus the short depression.
FDR’s wage and price control policies were really those inherited from the Hoover administration. The New Deal policies like the CCC, the gold confiscation of 1933, and many other policies were of course FDR and not Hoover. But the mandate for higher wages was pure Herbert Hoover, passed on and continued by FDR. Doesn’t fit your ideology, I am sure, but those are the real historical facts. Best to stay away from Grant’s book and real history if you want to keep your ideology intact.
.
“Ron J – It’s obvious.Assume someone is paid $2.50 an hour because the employer can do it. Food Stamps and whatever else is provided via govt assistance comes out of YOUR pocket via taxes or via your share of the national debt. YOU are subsidizing the low paying employer. You are the sucker. The employer is the free rider.”
Wrong. The free market would be what was determining if someone would be paid $2.50 an hour for a particular job.
The government is forcing you to subsidize, not the employer. The employer is not a free rider. The employer in a free market is paying what the employer and the employee agree to. Wages drop when there is an excess of labor. Wages go up when there is a lack of labor.
Computer graphic artists were making 6 figures when the field began, due to a lack of people with the skills. As more people learned the skills, people were no longer getting 6 figure salaries.
In 1999, McDonald’s was paying starting workers at above minimum wage, as there was a lack of available workers.
Mike has rather JUMPED THE SHARK on this thorny issue!
Agree. If, for example, a fast food outlet can’t stay in business by paying a living wage and needs employee oriented government entitlements to stay in business, then there are probably too many fast food outlets.
Applying basic econ 101 perfect competition theory – if you can’t sell at a high enough price to cover your costs, then then supply of said goods in the market is too high and inefficient producers need to fall by the wayside. The fast food outlet operator should not claim to be a victim and expect indirect government benefits to cover his costs. Marginal cost exceeds marginal revenue. The supply curve needs to shift.
You see, there are two sides to every theory, the suppler and the consumer. The consumer of cheap labor is an inefficient producer who is skilled at screaming bloody murder if asked to cover all his/her costs and not depend on indirect government subsidies (food stamps for employees for example) as an off books source of income.
In addendum, for those employees who are driven out of jobs because their inefficient producer employers are driven out of business… Sorry.
Get some training in something in demand and find a hopefully better job. Temporary tuition and living assistance, not exploitative school loans, hopefully, will be cheaper than a perpetual right to food stamps that support both the employee directly and former employer indirectly. Let the ‘invisible hand’ do it’s work.
Or, of course, all entitlements can be eliminated so that the ‘invisible hand’ does its job as Adam Smith described. That, however, is not practical. It only sound good as a sound bite or when speaking to the choir.
Hi Mish,
I have been reading your blog for years , but I will have to disagree with the points you are making in regards to Uber
And Lyft.
As a former driver of Uber as well as a taxi driver, I think it’s fair to see both sides of the argument.
While I like Uber’s technology from a consumer perspective, as a former driver, I think volunteering my time to work
As a nonprofit for Uber while seeing my vehicles value drop 5% per month is absurd.
Who do you think subsidizes the passengers cheap fares, Uber?
Nope, the drivers…
Think I’m not being truthful, try driving your vehicle for two months, which is, BTW the
Average turnover for a driver right now, and you will find out that Uber and Lyfts business model
Is based upon explotation of drivers ignorance of finance.
Imagine that, this is what a 60 billion dollar valuation is all about?
Exploiting drivers, ignoring safety rules put in place to protect the public while using a powerful
Lobbying machine to force governmental change while endangering the public, exposing them to
Inexperienced driver with questionable backgrounds?
Cmon Mish, you’re better than that…..
If the drivers feel like they are subsidizing Uber they have a simple choice: stop driving!
Doe anyone force people to work for Uber?
Or just have Uber provide the vehicle! Oh, wait, then it wouldn’t be an actual profitable business model.
I had a boss who would say to us: Are you working for your car, or is your car working for you? Uber drivers are making their cars work for them. Makes good sense, you pay the vehicle costs anyway. Make the car work for its keep.
In Los Angeles I hear plenty of stories about people who go off unemployment by working with Uber, and make more money than they did on their old jobs (not hard to do). If you like working when you choose and making more money, then why not? If it doesn’t work for you, then you don’t do it. But just because you do not like it is no reason to stop others. Uber drivers are providing a useful service, and service jobs are all there is with the manufacturing going overseas (add Obamacare to the regulatory reasons to leave).
Have a friend who works at a large upscale hotel that has hosted USA presidents, and he tells me 80% of the guests now use Uber. Not so much because of money, but because better customer service; the taxi drivers are perceived as rude and surly. But I can understand how taxi owners feel. If I paid hundreds of thousands of dollars to local government for a taxi medallion (monopoly) and more for a vehicle, I would be outraged and want my money back or the competition squashed by the government that sold me the monopoly medallion. Without government protection from competition, taxis need more or better customer service or government permission to lower fares to compete. Fact of life, life is tougher with competition. It’s like when deregulation came to the airlines; or when MCI broke up AT&T’s long distance monopoly (way pre-Skype). Every industry comes up with reasons why they need government protection. That the taxi drivers and Medallion sellers got Elizabeth Warren on their side shows they have the political power; will be interesting to see if they can quash this outbreak of free enterprise. But, like the airlines and phone companies, I suspect the taxis will have to live with the new reality.
I was sitting in a restaurant watching driver after driver come by and pick up meals to be delivered. These people are independent contractors driving their own vehicles. So, besides their time they also need to cover the cost of their vehicle. I have to imagine most of these people are making below minimum wage. Ask me why this is working right now. I do not think most people are smart enough to figure their cost of doing this and how much they are making. Sad! If a commercial cab company could figure out a way to do this at a much lower costs than competitors they would and drive other competitors out of business.
Love how you forget that your vehicle depreciates when not used to generate income as well. Makes more economic sense to use it to generate income and tax benefits to offset its costs.
Don’t worry. Uber will do you a favor by not requiring drivers to sacrifice themselves or their vehicles in the near future. They might even need to rename themselves JohnnyCab…
100% correct, gustav.
Herein lies the problem many like Warren believe business owners would not be in existence if the government was not here. Employee benefits she exposes were never a part of an employee package. Benefits was businesses way around federal government pay controls from FDR and nothing more. You see FDR created wage caps and business trying to recruit better people used benefits as a way to recruit better people because everyone was pay capped.
Personally I would look for a job that had bennies if I was talented enough to be recruited for a better job. I guarantee you all of our politicians that actually were not career politicians at one time did not pay everyone they hired benefits including Ms. Warren.
Actually, all businesses are government creations. Businesses don’t exist without private property laws and their enforcement. And limited liability is also a government creation. The vast majority of profitable businesses don’t exist without limited liability.
Oh and the reason most benefits are provided by employers (or were) is because that is the way businesses wanted it. Back in the ’20’s there were significant discussions about this. Germany under Bismarck had instituted a number of social security systems provided by the government which American businesses found anathema. American workers had to understand that all the benefits of life came from laboring for someone else.
The problem was that in the move from the farm to manufacturing plant, Americans lost their land and family support. Something that is hard for us to understand today. Socialism was in the air, so providing basic benefits to employees to workers would keep at least those who were working from rising up. FDR and The Great Depression ended some of that, not all.
Not fair to taxicab companies, she means. I used to drive a cab; for the privelege of operating a licensed cab, I had to pay $110 (1992) “rent”, more if I wanted a working vehicle. For that, I then got the uncertainty of whether I would make any money at all, and no minimum wage. The fares got exhorbitant rates; and the city got to control “who does what”.
If there ever was a target for unjust political control of industry, that would be it.
Don’t bother asking Elizabeth Warren; she’s in the industry of injustice for the money and power; she won’t bother to think of an honest answer.
Read her books and you might get a different idea.
Yeah, her Pow Wow Chow cookbook entries really cleared things up for me. Especially clarified her claim of Native American ancestry that she still cannot document. But the claim sure landed her a sweet Harvard job. But I guess that nowadays it is just enough to “identify” as such. She has the new system down pat. A shining example…
Warren isn’t a Luddite or a French socialist, she is American Indian! Sarc…
Who cares what she says anyhow? The Dem’s don’t care about the poor and poverty stricken. If they did the poverty rate would not have gone up nearly 3% under the current administration.
If Hillary gets elected, we will have a new poverty term to add to the vernacular. Energy poverty via climate policy. #anyonebuthillary2016
Poverty is a VERY profitable industry for politicians. Without the poor, what power would they really have, with no great injustices in the world to champion? They invented the war on poverty and the war on drugs and the war on illiteracy and the war on terror and the war on climate and if we look closely we will see that their real war is on US.
Post of the day?
Nope
Post of the week?
Nope
Post of the month?
Nope
Post of the year?
YES!!
Watch what you say about our future first American Indian President.
Yes, we wouldn’t want to be racists. But you have to admit it’s a most impenetrable defense. Look how well it has worked for Obama, and you can bet Hillary will be pushing sexist misogyny in her defense. After all, it IS impossible for a white male to not be a racist, sexist, misogynist and criticize anyone else. The pinnacle of multicultural diversity is non white.
The way to make things fair is to either tax the value of all employee benefits offered by acceptable employers or offer a double tax deduction for the out of pocket costs for those working without a benefits package. The resolution to the injustice is through changing tax policy. Something the senator can get to work on right away.
The only thing fair is for each to pay for what they consume. Empathy is NOT fairness, especially when one person’s empathy is paid for by someone else’s labor….by force. We are told that this is the cost of a civilized society, a civilization who’s rules are created by someone other than those imposed upon to be civil.
What we fear more than anything is a society comprised of free people, people we cannot control. Once control is obtained there is naturally a loss of respect and an increase in contempt for those being controlled, their existence only providing a means and resource for even more “civilization”.
We sheep join with our government in “democratic”might to use TAX to punish,control and provide the means to advance their agenda. Business carried the bulk of this weight but does so somewhat agreeably as long as they think these taxes are spread uniformly enough to not impede competition, knowing full well that in those situations…or ones even more deliberately advantageous, they can pass ALL of the TAXES on to their customers.
The blind sheep we are, we are more than happy to see taxes increase in our pursuit of economic justice (and potentially more government derived benefits), pretending in our delusion that the real burden is carried by someone else less deserving. Meanwhile our jobs and lifestyles evaporate and all we can do is blame those taking advantage of the circumstances WE have created.
Now THAT is economic justice!
Warren is just trying to preserve the government receipts from granting taxi monopolies in cities that are controlled by Democrats and are a major source of Democrat patronage.
Not true at all. Read the actual article about Warren.
“In a speech at an annual conference for the New America Foundation in Washington, Warren acknowledged these so-called “gig economy” jobs — powered by independent contractors who set their own hours — appeal to workers’ sense of self-determination. But she warned that freedom currently comes at the expense of many other fundamental rights and protections.
“The much-touted virtues of flexibility, independence and creativity offered by gig work might be true for some workers under some conditions,” she said, “but for many, the gig economy is simply the next step in a losing effort to build some economic security in a world where all the benefits are floating to the top 10 percent.”
Warren stopped short of blaming these companies for their workers’ ills, instead portraying them as fundamental problems that date back to the Industrial Revolution. Unfortunately, many current policies — implemented in response to the Industrial Revolution — are now obsolete.
The very fundamentals of what it means to be a worker in the economy are shifting, just like the industries that are themselves being upended. And, according to Warren, we should welcome the shift, so long as worker protections are positively disrupted as well:
In a healthy economy, disruption is inevitable. But disruption means it’s time to adapt to changing circumstances, time for new businesses and old businesses to change, time to rethink the deal for employees, contract workers, and gig workers. Disruption creates the push to rethink the basic bargain for workers who produce much of the value in this economy.
“The gig economy didn’t invent any of these problems,” she explained. “The problems facing gig workers are much like the problems facing millions of other workers. An outdated employee benefits model makes it all but impossible for temporary workers, contract workers, part-time workers and workers in industries like retail or construction who switch jobs frequently to build any economic security.”
To address those ills, the senator urged policymakers to “rethink the basic bargain between workers and companies.” She argued in favor of strengthening the economic safety net to counter volatility in the workplace.
“I believe we start with one simple principle: all workers — no matter when they work, where they work, who they work for, whether they pick tomatoes or build rocket ships–all workers should have some basic protections and be able to build some economic security for themselves and their families,” she said. “No worker should fall through the cracks.”
Warren highlighted three initiatives in particular: first, ensuring all who work contribute to Social Security; second, requiring catastrophe insurance for every worker; and third, providing all workers with paid leave.
“These three — Social Security, catastrophic insurance, and earned leave — create a safety net for income. Together they give families some protection in an ever-more-volatile work environment, and they help ensure that, after a lifetime of work, people will face their last years with dignity.”
And the one thing we should NEVER have is personal responsibility or the freedom to choose our own path. Instead we are to trade it all for a safety net that can only be provided by our government…the beloved stability that they provide, just like in our stock market where they have put a security net under investors effectively trying to remove all risk, which of course, only leads to ever more risky behaviors. The government has collected record revenues yet our debt continues to climb. How much WILL this safety net cost us?
We shall see. I think we already know.
In the city where I live empty buses drive up and down the streets. At time as many as four may be in view at one time. The article below is comprised of real numbers directly from the Fort Wayne Public Transportation Corporation annual report and my take on them. These are numbers that are easy to get your head around. I feel it refutes more than one myth about some mass transit systems.
http://brucewilds.blogspot.com/2015/05/public-transportation-and-empty-buses.html
It is only important to appear caring and empathetic, and those who only speak of costs or actual effectiveness are haters of the highest order.
Elizabeth Warren is a 3rd rate socialist economics “professor” who would have never been hired or retained by Harvard expect for her faked American Indian credentials.
She now ties into the the Free Sh*t Army (FSA) just as the entire democrat machine does.
The FSA needs more free sh*t every year or they won’t vote for support their candidate.
Eventually, it all turns into Detroit. But remember, democrats had unchallenged power in Detroit for 50+ years and most high in the party retired as millionaires.
Mish is a booster for the future where everything is automated and there are no human beings doing any work at all. He thinks we will all be bloggers or robot repairmen (robots will make their own repairs). In fact we will leave the labor force and live on food stamps just as is happening now. The future in America is only going to be good for the 1% and Trump is part and parcel of that 1%.
Automation is coming whether Mish talks about it or not. Insane minimum wage laws, insane governmental regulations and even more insane unions will only make that day come faster.
The future of America has been destroyed by obama and the democrat party.
Name ONE policy or political stance obama has done that more easily allows a business to set up or hire someone.
Name ONE policy or political stance that hillary will do that more easily allows a business to set up or hire someone.
Trump is a reaction the insanity of obama and hillary.
The working class see it. The factory workers see it. The middle class see it. The farmers see it. Everyone who works see it.
The only people who don’t see it are the free sh*t army, government union employees, crony capitalists who use government to protect/subsidize their industries and left wing “government is the answer to every problem” fools.
Didn’t see ZIRP and NIRP in your rant.
Lowering hurdle rates for automation to zero is the main driver de-employeeing the economy.
Exactly! Debt IS the driver to economic imbalances, malinvestments that destroys markets…and jobs. Who in their right mind would borrow money to eliminate their jobs unless they thought the “borrowed” money was limitless and would never be repaid? It does not need to be said as it is demonstrated every day. Not a soul on his planet thinks that ANY of our sovereign debt will EVER be repaid. It is money from heaven, only to find it is actually a debt to hell.
In a world that embraces competition, there will still be winners and losers but we will be left to our own devices to be so. In our “brave NEW world” winners will be selected by winners based upon their most public declarations of empathy for the losers. Trump does not fit that mold. He has not been selected by the winners (to their most obvious despair) but instead has been selected by the losers…not losers to competition, but losers to the selectors. Trump is someone who has wallowed in the filth of our corruption and rather than embrace it, has sought to expose it and remove it. Many of us who have businesses can relate as to survive or prosper, we are forced to capitulate and play the game….and we HATE IT.
Is it racist to attack a Cherokee in such uninhibited terms?
Is it racist to brand such uninhibited terms an attack?
Or is it freedom of speech we hold in contempt?
Don’t confuse holding freedom of speech in contempt with having contempt for the person using it freely to expose the world to their petty bigotry.
Maybe the problem lies in a social and economic model in which people have to look to their employer to meet their “basic” needs. Employer-provided health care is the result of government meddling to begin with, when government stepped in and prevented employers from raising wages.
Interesting history on health care. Back in the pre-WWII days there wasn’t much need for health care insurance companies (though they did exist). Why? Because most men belonged to social organizations (think Elks Club and Shriners) in the days before teevee. One of the key purposes of those organizations was to negotiate benefits for its members, including pricing with local physicians and hospitals.
The AMA, though an older organization, grew as a direct result of this. Doctors hated negotiating prices with their lessors. Hence support of the AMA grew and the corruption of state governments to force AMA control over doctor licensing and market control.
This allowed the non-capitalist health care system in the US along with exorbitant pricing. Hence, the need for health insurance.
I travel a lot and I do not take Uber. First, Uber drivers unlike taxi drivers are not required to have a commercial driver’s license which has more safe guards in it. I was sitting in a pub the other day, saw someone picked up by a Uber driver who immediately did an illegal u-turn on a four lane very busy road. Now the Commercial drivers license would not prevent that buy it does indicate the type of driver. Secondly, I do not believe the amount of insurance the Uber drivers are required to carry is sufficient. Third, as mentioned above if Taxi drivers are required to be licensed then the Uber drivers should also be required to have a license. This is not sharing a ride with a friend this is a commercial business. If you service a bad experience with a cab driver you can report them. Besides most Uber drivers I see drive Priuses. Now besides the established fact that most Prius drivers are some of the worse drivers in the world (I have seen with my own eyes as well as ratings — don’t ask me why) I do not want to be scrunched back into the back of a Prius.
Mish – I agree with you on most things, but if Uber drivers are going to be commerical drivers then they should meet the requirements of commercial drivers. I am not a Luddite, but when you offer a service to the public then certain standards need to be met.
I take taxis and uber/lyft all across of America.
All of requirements above (CDL, more insurance, not Priuses, etc.) does not make for a pleasant taxi ride. In fact, most are pretty terrible and expensive and unsafe in many instances. NONE of your governmental regulations have helped. Why is that?
Uber and Lyft are much more pleasant rides and far less expensive. Without any governmental regulations. Imagine that. The free market works.
Now what I think you are really trying to say is that Uber and Lyft and exploiting the poor service and high cost of ANY governmental monopoly by skirting the insane laws and regulations that made it a monopoly in the first place.
Business has always been a means of concentrating government power. We are licensed and operate at the will of the state, we are forced to collect their taxes under extreme penalty, income, social security, sales and franchise taxes all. It is only reasonable that they would also take something like health insurance which is a relatively recent development (and dependency) and put it too under our responsibility mantle. Now that this capture is complete they are further concentrating their hold on power and control by slowly squeezing smaller businesses out and we end up with fewer and fewer large businesses dominating the employment. If you pay attention, government has continually made small business and startups harder by the year to pull off. Look at the stats for the last ten years and you will see that startups are abysmal and small businesses are failing.
M&A has been where it is at….Too big to fail and big enough to buy protection. We used to see corporations seeking market dominance as their solution to competition, but now it is being large enough to buy protection from government through its infinite channels of control. Rather than actually competing to gain market dominance, they simply buy it….with cheap government created fiat, and its use to buy lawmakers and enforcers.
We are licensed and operate at the will of the state, we are forced to collect their taxes under extreme penalty,
You guys are funny! Of course I am licensed by the state but I would welcome you to seek the services of someone in my line who is not licensed and I can guarantee you, you will meet with one thing — disaster. In fact people can seek out unlicensed people in my line of business and guess what generally they don’t. Besides having to meet very rigid standards to get the license I am also required to get at least 40 hours on continuing education a year.
As I said, you don’t have to hire someone with my license (even though I just got off of the phone with another person looking for my skill set as I type this and work comes both across the country and international).
Did all the criteria I set out guarantee a good journey. Nope but at lease if I have a bad driver I know I will be insured in an accident and if they have a commercial drivers license then I know they have been through a criminal background check as well as DUI etc.
It should be an even playing field. If UBER drivers do not need this then the taxicab drivers should not either.
100% correct and exactly the key points at issue, Ishmael.
The funny part about the targets of what Warren is bashing, Uber and Lyft, are that they are used mainly by liberals…who don’t favor regulation of these companies.
https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2016/may/18/sharing-economy-pew-survey-airbnb-uber
None of this debate is relevant now that there is Obama care. The very idea that it mandatory if one signs up or pays the penalty to me it means your paid a premium and your covered .
People can chose to work for a taxi company or be a independent contractor.
If someone feels insecure in a über than can hire a taxi.
Mish is 100 percent right to side with the free market. Choice is the driving force the commercial market has to cater to in a free society.
The less government the better the market.
I spend my money where I get the best value.
The free market must offer that value to compete for my business.
Competition is what makes a free market it gives me choice.
No, signing up for ObamaScare does not mean you are “covered” for hardly anything and many doctors are totally refusing to even take ACA (ObamaScare) plans so the chance you can’t even get any medical services is increasing exponentially everyday for those who “signed up.”
Moreover, the FOR-HIRE LIVERY SERVICE BUSINESS has always been a highly regulated business requiring COMMERCIAL DRIVERS LICENSES along with a number of other requirements, and Uber and Lyft are attempting to engage in providing those services WHILE TOTALLY EVADING THOSE LEGAL REQUIREMENTS TO OPERATE which is why many municipalities are moving aggressively to get them shut down totally in many areas around the country as they are in outright violation of existing laws governing the for-hire livery service business.
As Mencken described an election being “an advance auction of stolen goods,” Uber and Lyft are apparently not bidders.
Uber and Lyft not bidders?
http://www.theverge.com/2014/12/14/7390395/uber-lobbying-steamroller
“Ms Warren said the US was suffering from an “outdated employee benefits model” that made it hard for temporary and contract workers in the tech sector and beyond to build any personal economic security.”
The US is suffering from those in government who think they can engineer benefit models and force them on a market, as if it exists in a vacuum. More and more, businesses are hiring temp and contract workers in response to government mandates. Warren is complaining about something, she herself is causing to occur.
Warren is complaining about something, she herself is causing to occur.
Precisely!
Nein!
Nein! Nein! Nein! Nein! Nein!
Autonomous Driving Verboten!
Programmer Error!
Control Alternate Delete!
Control Alternate Delete!
There are very valid reasons for requiring all commercial for-hire livery services to comply with local laws – including commercial drivers licenses for all driver – as well as a number of regulations and those are all local issues that have nothing to do with the federal government. And those areas are where both Uber and Lyft are essentially ILLEGAL BUSINESS MODELS attempting to evade those common sense requirements to ensure the safety of customers of for-hire livery service businesses.
Watch the Brexit documentary to understand our problems and where we are headed – https://www.armstrongeconomics.com/international-news/europes-current-economy/britexit-the-movie/.
The heart of the problem lies with govt largess and all the economy-killing consequences that follow. Reduce the size of govt, stop deficit spending, and eliminate the career politician with short term-limits and we might have a chance to save our freedoms and country.
Sociopaths and losers like Warren, backed by the unchecked power of govt, will always advocate for their self-interest. If the EU no longer existed, which would help the European economy, what would all those useless bureaucrats do? Of course govt is going to defend their perky lifestyle. It is up to the people to keep them in check.
Democrats claim to be pro science and technology but in practice they are often not and Warren is a perfect example of that
I’m going to love it when Trump is elected and all the Trumpists here start whining and complaining about the lunatic directions he will be taking the country. I’ll be living in Uruguay by then so I don’t really care what happens but it’s going to be fun to watch. One of the reasons I am voting for Trump because I want to see the bus go over the cliff!
FRANCE is in TERRIBLE SHAPE
The employment/population ratio for age 25-54 is 80.5% [76.7]
The labor force participation rate for said group is 88.2% [80.9]
In the United States things are much better! [compare the square brackets]
(OECD numbers for 2014, last year available)
Note that the upper echelons of these types of charts are all dominated by countries with a socialist bent [Sweden, Switzerland, Denmark, the Netherlands, Germany, even Canada, etc].
Better to ignore statistics on:
unemployment (definition dependent) or
the young (in school, hard to compare because government pays?) or
the old (differences in retirement ages, working because of poverty)
Shopping in Paris during the Spring is just as wonderful as ever, and I have two friends who flew to Paris this week to have a great shopping spree as well as dropping by Cannes for the Film Fest in the French Riviera.
“…reducing traffic congestion…”. I cannot agree with you on this point. It may perhaps reduce some parking congestion.
Since LAX began allowing rideshare services access to the airport it has become a gridlock nightmare. Lyft/Uber drivers are some of the most clueless drivers on the road. Often pulling over without signaling in random spots blocking traffic with no consideration for what is the resultant clusterphuck behind them. It was bad enough with just don’t give a phuck bus drivers but now we have them en masse in automobiles. It was shortsighted of the city of LA to allow rideshare autos access to LAX and it is on them to rethink this. Perhaps moving violations should not be negated with traffic school as it is for commercially licensed drivers and enforce harsher fines.
Last weekend I was at a local German Beer fest venue. There were dozens of people standing around on the sidewalks outside the venue obviously waiting to be picked up. Oh the horror of these moronic drivers blocking traffic, cruising barely at a few miles per hour soliciting everyone(like they’re trying to pick up hookers or score drugs), pulling random u-turns w/o any warning, double parking/standing, etc. The venue has to employ half a dozen parking staff to keep these ‘congestion reducing’ rideshare vermin out of their parking lot and the cul-de-sac they’re located on.
Stop your deification of ridesharing. It has some perks but it’s a zero sum game. These people are not going to make a living doing it. As you stated, most of these are part-time 2 jobbers. They are likely tired from their first job and probably shouldn’t be behind the wheel. Traffic will be worse not lessoned. You will just have more unskilled drivers behind the wheel and on the road increasing traffic problems and accident rates which leads to higher premiums for everyone.
Unfortunately, you are describing the typical driver in Los Angeles. Matters little whether a bus, shuttle, taxi, or private vehicle. I never cease to be amazed every day. Drivers making up their own rules. Left turns from the right turn lanes, right turns from the left lanes. Entering via exits only fitting one vehicle when you are trying to exit, and then giving you lip when you look at them reproachingly. Many like to take up a lane and a half, not wanting to leave their old lane behind when changing into a new lane. Gets a bit like a Third World country, which is perhaps what it is.
100% correct, Alan.
Both Uber and Lyft should be PUT OUT OF BUSINESS totally as they are essentially operating ILLEGALLY in violation of public livery service requirements in most areas where they are operating and should never have been allowed to operate in the first place. Fortunately, many areas are moving to shut these unregulated “services” down, and it can’t happen soon enough to get rid of them.
Fauxcohontas has been twitting all week and is the laughingstock of the internet as a result. Loonie Lizzie would be more convincing if she made an avatar of herself with a turkey feather in her hair and a tomahawk in her hand.
Do we really want to allow crazed unregulated drivers without valid commercial driver’s licenses to be picking up passengers for hire by a public for-hire livery service? What could possibly go wrong?
Uber gunman who killed six is DRAGGED out of court after his interruptions reduce survivor to tears and finishes the hearing via video while being physically restrained
The Michigan Uber driver accused of killing six people in a brutal shooting spree was dragged out of the courtroom by deputies on Friday morning. Jason Dalton raised his voice and interrupted the testimony of one of the two people who survived the horrific rampage, causing the woman to break down in tears on the stand. Dalton also shouted about people with ‘black bags’ before Judge Christopher Haenicke was forced to call a recess as Dalton was removed from the room.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3601297/Chaos-erupts-courtroom-Uber-gunman-killed-six-DRAGGED-deputies-interrupting-testimony-causing-survivor-break-tears-stand.html
Inflation is the problem. Uber is an attempt to escape the bank’s taxi inflation. Shoppers want deflation. Uber is deflation. Deflation is good.
Uber is nothing more than a parasitic business model based on defying basic consumer protections put in by local and state
Governments such as , for example background checks and drug testing.
In addition, Uber’s and lyfts business model is based upon driver ignorance of finance and you say this company is worth,
80 billion, a company living off. The. Largesse of their investors, give me a break, I’m sure these same people thought Enron
And global crossings were great companies too, what about that testing company theranos, aren’t they going ds in flames
Too?
This may be the year, the Unicorns get killed by the dozen and good riddance, greed on overdrive…….
I never commented on what Uber is worth. But I love the service. And so do business travelers. It is not parasitic except in the myopic eyes of taxi drivers and French unions.
The rest of your comments about Enron and Global Crossing are 100% absurd, having noting at all to do with Uber. The company has a real plan that the market place clearly supports. Uber has survived and grown despite politicians and misguided fools attempting to stop progress.
Pingback: Elizabeth Warren Phone Number – All About Donald Trump