Business, Economics, Law, Media Criticism, Political Commentary, Technology and Society

California’s War On The Gig Economy

10 Comments

The Democrats in the House wants to make the brutality national.

I was approached by a guy in the Costco parking lot the other day with a petition to repeal AB5. I happily signed it (though I’m not registered to vote in CA). I don’t think that Sacramento understands how angry people get when you wipe out their livelihood. Fortunately, Cocaine Mitch will kill this monstrosity in the Senate.

[Late-morning update]

In California, protecting workers means outlawing their jobs.

10 thoughts on “California’s War On The Gig Economy”

  2. “Everything inside the State, nothing outside the State!” When they nationalize the private sector we will all be working for the State! Hoorah!

  4. This is being pushed by the big labor unions. As always, follow the money. The Democrats are pushing this legislation to do the unions’ bidding. If the unions are happy, they provide big “campaign contributions” and in-kind contributions to the Democrats. Screw the workers, it’s all about power and money.

    1. The same holds true in California, where the idiot who wrote the legislation still can’t understand that not everyone wants to be a union worker in a hubcap factory or a script kiddie or cubicle troll at Big Tech Inc.

      I consider this a huge own-goal for team Nancy, and have been saying so to Democrats. Not only does it affect Uber and Lyft drivers in San Francisco, which would be bad enough politically, it affects Uber and Lyft passengers across the nation, including all the battleground states. Now ride services will come with a political rant by a Democrat driver who will have to admit that he’s praying that Cocaine Mitch and Donald J Trump do something to protect his livelihood, and his family’s livelihood, from Nancy and her moronic minions.

      He might expound at length on how his beloved party has become hostage to corrupt mafia bosses who want to force him into that hubcap factory job, or taken over by elite-coast party officials who want him dependent on welfare and food stamps so they can control him.

      The bill would also hit all the free-lance writers who, as fate would have it, do so much to shape American political opinions. All those Instagram and Youtube influencers might have a few choice words about it, too.

      At some point a lot of moderate Democrats, and even far-left Democrats who see that their income and economic freedom is about to take a huge hit, will start to realize they’re sailing on the Pequod with a deranged and obsessed lunatic at the helm. They’re have to face the fact that they need to mutiny or abandon ship.

  5. One aspect of this is that it complete destroys one of Pelosi’s arguments for Obamacare. The argument was by individuals having insurance on their own; they’d be free from corporations and allowed to create on their own and work as they like.

    1. I remember stirring up hornet’s nests in college by pointing out that labor unions are also multinational corporations.

  6. The comments about the involvement of labor unions reminds me of this story (from 2015).

    Labor leaders, who were among the strongest supporters of the citywide minimum wage increase approved last week by the Los Angeles City Council, are advocating last-minute changes to the law that could create an exemption for companies with unionized workforces.

    The push to include an exception to the mandated wage increase for companies that let their employees collectively bargain was the latest unexpected detour as the city nears approval of its landmark legislation to raise the minimum wage to $15 an hour by 2020.

    It didn’t happen as far as I can tell, but it’s a remarkable example of how two-faced they can be about such things when it’s to their advantage.

  7. Someone tell me what I’m missing, but isn’t the fact that there is a “gig economy” an indicator of serious problems? For example, all these college-educated people in their 20s and 30s are working as freelance journalists and basket weavers and whatnot because they were trained for careers that hardly exist. It’s not as if they chose a life without hope of decent health insurance or a 401(k).

    1. Someone tell me what I’m missing, but isn’t the fact that there is a “gig economy” an indicator of serious problems?

      How would you use this indicator for good? Somehow I doubt removing the indicator, as proposed in California, solves the serious problems it indicates.

      In the meantime, the indicator also is a fix, generating wealth for the people working the gig economy.

Comments are closed.