
Gig workers handed lifeline by $2T stimulus plan - somebehemoth
https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2020/03/gig-workers-handed-lifeline-by-2-trillion-stimulus-plan/
======
jameslk
> Rideshare drivers, food deliverers, Airbnb hosts, and any other types of
> freelance workers left out of work will be compensated thanks to the bill,
> with the precise amount to be determined in accordance with state
> unemployment laws.

I'm really curious how this will work. What qualifies you for this? Not
receiving any income? Or only partial income? And how long must you go without
income? Or is there some other way to qualify?

Does this extend to all freelancers? What about pass through companies?

~~~
sharkmerry
Do we really need to be helping out Airbnb hosts? maybe im just being short-
sighted

~~~
lonelappde
That was made up by the author, who was grasping for examples. An Airbnb owner
is a landlord, not a worker.

------
ProAm
"Washington has answered the increasingly desperate pleas of gig-economy
executives by agreeing to include hard-up workers among the beneficiaries of
the $2 trillion stimulus bill"

Are they employees or not? Does the gig-economy companies pay into the
unemployment tax?

These people are hurting but I believe this sets a really bad precedent

~~~
throwqwerty
oh no! who will think of the precedent!!!

~~~
ProAm
I mean these gig-economy execs strive really hard to not pay contractors
benefits or pay unemployment tax, etc... The employees are working a gig job,
they get paid strictly off supply and demand, demand goes up they make more
money, demand goes down or supply goes up and they make less (or no money).
With the bailout were basically saying its OK to not pay taxes but expect a
bailout, people that rent out their houses on airbnb as a job, etc....

Everyone needs help during the pandemic, but the execs from these companies
should get zero say because these are not their employees. They are not laid
off, not furloughed. There just isnt demand in their 'gig'.

~~~
throwqwerty
>With the bailout were basically saying its OK to not pay taxes but expect a
bailout

suppose this were true and this legislation set that precedent? let me ask
you: how often do we have a need for a "bailout"? do a really quick
cost/benefit analysis and you'll see that you're implying we should let these
people struggle today to save some money in ~10 years. does that make sense to
you?

~~~
ProAm
Thats absolutely not what Im saying, Im saying that these company execs that
want the government to help their contractors are being so selfishly
hypocritical. If they want to help their contractors, these billion dollar
companies can offer things like health insurance, PTO/sick leave, etc... It's
insane they are asking the government to help these contractors so they can
continue to make money as a business as cheap as possible when things are back
in order.

Of course we should help these people. Everyone should help and paying taxes
and providing benefits is the social agreement we've made in this country so
we can help when issues like this arise.

