I asked where we draw the line, not if we draw it.
All of your examples are incredibly unlikely things for two informed parties to enter into. In fact, the reasons those laws exist is because of the information asymmetry. That seems reasonable to me.
But gig workers are not under the illusion that they are going to receive healthcare or other benefits. It's like if I took a job offer for $X and then demanded I was being exploited because I want $Y. I fully support gig workers in pushing for more, I absolutely do. These are natural market forces. Everyone should act in their own self interest...we know that Uber will.
I just think that in this instance, this qualifies as government overreach.
> I just think that in this instance, this qualifies as government overreach.
Considering the bought and paid for political legislatures with lobbying money and unusual whales funded by corporate interests, if you think this little blip by workers is “overreach” then you’d be flabbergasted by what corporate lobbyists get away with.
I answered it. We draw the line where there are demonstrable harms to society and when information or power asymmetry is not avoidable, which externalizes costs onto society as a whole.
All of your examples are incredibly unlikely things for two informed parties to enter into. In fact, the reasons those laws exist is because of the information asymmetry. That seems reasonable to me.
But gig workers are not under the illusion that they are going to receive healthcare or other benefits. It's like if I took a job offer for $X and then demanded I was being exploited because I want $Y. I fully support gig workers in pushing for more, I absolutely do. These are natural market forces. Everyone should act in their own self interest...we know that Uber will.
I just think that in this instance, this qualifies as government overreach.