Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login

The Triangle Shirtwaist Factory fire[1] was a real-life example.

People in that factory worked there of their own free will.

Children working in mines[2] also did so of their own free will.

It is the fondest dream of many a libertarian to take us back to those days, where people could work freely, without government interference.

[1] - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Triangle_Shirtwaist_Factory_fi...

[2] - https://rarehistoricalphotos.com/child-miners-lewis-hine/




The fact that you have to go 100 years in the past for your examples speaks volumes.

Today's companies pay employees hundreds of thousands while enticing them with onsite massages and ping pong tables.

People have choices and it’s thanks to a healthy, diverse job market, not due to government intervention.

You want to help workers? Go ahead and build companies that offer well paid, decent jobs. Don’t rob people of their best asset: choice.


How many drivers is Uber paying hundreds of thousands of dollars plus massages and ping pong tables to?

We're talking about people not even getting health care coverage, and who may actually be losing money on the balance, due to the depreciation of their cars, insurance premiums, maintenance, and other costs which they, rather than their employer, have to bear, thanks to Prop 22.

The point I was making, however, was not about Uber drivers specifically, but about the position that as long as an arrangement is freely agreed to it's ok.

That attitude leads to all sorts of exploitation. Uber's arrangement with their drivers is just the tip of the iceberg. Amazon's exploitation of their warehouse workers is a related example, with much worse done in countries that have no labor or workplace safety laws.


How many drivers is Uber sending to work in mines or in unsafe garment factories?

But more to your point: are you sure you know better than the people entering arrangements if they are exploited or not? Are you sure you are taking into consideration all their particular situation and their current life trade offs to take their decision for them? Are you sure you are so smart and all knowing that you absolutely know what this way their life will be better in the long term?

Secondly, are you sure there are no drawbacks and downsides for the society when you take away people's options through the power of law? No unexpected results or side effects? No historical precedents where this attitude backfired?

Finally, are you sure you are fighting a good cause and not helping someone else’s plans? Have you asked who and why wrote AB5? Have you asked how many exceptions it came with and how many more where added afterwards? Have you wondered if this is even proper governance?


Factory fires are not terribly uncommon in developing nations, much more recently than 100 years ago: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2012_Dhaka_garment_factory_fir...


Again - a developing nation is pretty much how the USA was 100 years ago...




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: