There's something utterly perverse with the logic that "Some people are getting left-behind by the current economy; definitely definitely don't find them new, value-creating jobs because that will spirit-murder them."
There is also something utterly preverse in pretending exploitative "sharing economy" companies create the kind of "value" that should be encouraged, especially as it displaces less exploitative companies.
Which of course is a propagation of the very thing you claim they so nobly rescue these lost souls from!
> especially as it displaces less exploitative companies.
You're joking, right? Taxi drivers are practically indentured servants who begin each shift $100+ in the hole to some asshole rent-seeking capitalist who happened to buy the medallion at the right time 40 years ago.
There is no doubt taxi cab arrangements are often exploitive, but this article is not about Uber. The "especially as" portion of my statement was in reference to circumstances where this model isn't just pushing out equally exploitative relationships.
But even that being so in Uber's case, why are people championing the replacement of one abusive relationship with another?
What's abusive about Uber? You drive whenever you want and their commission structure means their interests are aligned with yours and you can never lose money on a shift (at least not to Uber).
