
Gig Work That Works - Mz
http://micheleincalifornia.blogspot.com/2016/02/gig-work-that-works.html
======
tluyben2
This is again someone who maybe can do something which can be done as gig
easily online. This simply is not an option for most people. It is like
saying, as a coder, that I can do a few $1000 a week so basic income at all is
not needed as there are enough programming gigs. That is true (for now) but in
these cases (and other brain jobs like legal advice, accounting etc) we are
referring to a tiny piece of humanity; for now, and imho into the far future,
the rest has no hope in hell of doing it.

While I agree that gig jobs can work fine for some, it is naive to say that
because of it we would not need radically different solutions to replace other
jobs.

It is also naive to say it is not a race to the bottom as hat is already
happening across the board with gigs anyway.

~~~
yummyfajitas
By "race to the bottom" do you mean "the bottom slice of humanity is
experiencing rapid growth in income"?

[https://2.bp.blogspot.com/-0we_c3Ob8Ds/UrDEMjcK3MI/AAAAAAAAE...](https://2.bp.blogspot.com/-0we_c3Ob8Ds/UrDEMjcK3MI/AAAAAAAAEb8/Izydk1Hsi8I/s1600/milanovic+1.jpg)

Also relevant:
[https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2016/01/13/this-...](https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2016/01/13/this-
may-be-the-most-important-chart-for-understanding-politics-today/)

The need for a radical solution lies in the far future. I know large numbers
of educated professionals who clean their own homes but would be happy to pay
$10-15/hour to have this problem solved. (I pay well over $15/hour, and need
to turn to overseas folks for virtual labor.) Talking about the problem of
human labor being obsolete during a time of labor scarcity is like worrying
about mars being overpopulated.

~~~
alanwatts
>The need for a radical solution lies in the far future.

How far in the future? What KPI would we look at to know when there is a need
for a new solution to replace our legacy economic model?

~~~
yummyfajitas
As a very concrete way to think of it, consider the typical middle class
lifestyle in India. Consider all the labor that is regularly outsourced -
house cleaning, cooking, laundry, etc. If I want to eat a paan, buy a
cigarette, or other snack/consumable, I only need to walk a city block or so
before I can find someone willing to sell it to me. Any educated female can
easily afford child care so she can work. My office has multiple servants to
make life easier for the skilled labor employed therein; if you want maggie,
momos or beer, just give them some cash and they'll bring it to you.

At the moment the problem in the US is labor scarcity. Robots haven't replaced
these jobs, these jobs just don't get done.

When robots provide the same level of services to the US middle class, that
would be a signal that we might need to think about something like a BI. Until
then, BI is really solving the complete opposite problem to what we have.

~~~
brenschluss
> At the moment the problem in the US is labor scarcity. Robots haven't
> replaced these jobs, these jobs just don't get done.

Labor scarcity is another word for "there aren't enough people who want to
work for less," and you describe it as if it's a good thing for society as a
whole.

We have minimum wage for a reason, because with wages low enough to make a
neighborhood chai-seller a possibility, it means that the lower limit of a
societal standard of living plummets.

The fact that you present India, with its extreme income inequality, as an
example of a country that provides an ideal lifestyle for you is indicative.

~~~
yummyfajitas
According to the BI proponents, we have a shortage of jobs. Yet prices are
rising and work is simply going undone. That's completely the _opposite_ of
what would happen if they were right.

If you want to claim that less employment and lower production is a good
thing, go ahead.

Your facts are also wrong; the US has a GINI of 41 (comparable to the UK or
the Congo). In contrast, India has only 33.6 (comparable to France, Canada or
Sierra Leone). India has _absolute_ poverty which is a totally different
problem.

~~~
brenschluss
> India has absolute poverty which is a totally different problem.

Good point, but it doesn't change my argument; your conveniences are made
possible by the higher poverty / lower income of service providers.

> If you want to claim that less employment and lower production is a good
> thing, go ahead.

Do you believe that lowering standards of living by eliminating minimum wage
is a good thing, because it "increases employment and production"?

For example: Mumbai's trash and recycling ecosystem is largely driven by a
complex economy of ragpickers, sorters, and tiny recycling factories based in
informal settlements (Dharavi, etc). Last time I checked (Summer 2014), the
ragpickers are paid 5rs per kg, and on average collect about 10kg a day,
making that around 50rs, $0.75, or 48% the cost of a Big Mac (or its
equivalent, the Maharaja Mac) in India.

Would you really agree that someone who works all day to make 50% of a Big Mac
be an ideal model of employment and societal economic policy, because they're
working and thus raising employment and production?

Because that's what you're asking for if you're claiming that we need to stop
a "labor shortage" in order to provide more low-cost conveniences.

~~~
yummyfajitas
I didn't say we should adopt India's economic system. I said that we have a
labor scarcity, not a surplus, as demonstrated by all the work people would
_like_ to have done - and which other parts of the world demonstrate _can_ be
done - but which _isn 't_ being done (by humans or robots). Therefore a
solution designed for a surplus is counterproductive.

If indeed we have a _shortage_ rather than _scarcity_ (note the terms are not
synonymous - a shortage is a quantity supplied below market clearing rates),
then we should focus on the root causes of that shortage rather than simply
ignoring the problem. Minimum wage might be one such cause, though I rather
doubt it (market wages tend to be way above min wage). I suspect that if we
have an actual shortage it's regulatory constraints [1] and work disincentives
[2] that are the real problem.

[1] In the US people seem willing to sell cigarettes at convenient locations,
much like in India. But we have the unfortunate habit of using violence to
prevent this.
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Death_of_Eric_Garner](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Death_of_Eric_Garner)

[2] For instance, witness NPR's article on massive numbers of people
committing disability fraud to avoid work. If we cracked down on disability
fraud, some of those folks would have to return to the workforce.
[http://apps.npr.org/unfit-for-work/](http://apps.npr.org/unfit-for-work/)

------
danjayh
He says it works, but I say that at a pay rate of 1.5-5.0c/word, you'd have to
be crazy to do it. Take this with a grain of salt; I'm probably a bit biased
because the pay per "word" for software development is so much higher.

~~~
candeira
_she_ says it works...

------
ska
Interesting, but I don't buy the juxtaposition against basic income, which
really is designed to solve a different problem. No technical reason they
couldn't co-exist.

~~~
bryanlarsen
I think that gig work and basic income are very complementary. If we ever get
a basic income I think gig work will explode: much more demand for it from
workers who are much less interested in making extended commitments for work
but still interested in occasionally picking up extra cash on the side, and a
reduced need for regulation on the employer's side since it's so much easier
for giggers to say 'no'.

~~~
ska
That sounds plausible.

------
mikro2nd
Gig work that works (perhaps), but only for US citizens. I wonder why they
impose that restriction, seeing that they also state that as a contractor
(giggler?) you are responsible for all your own tax issues.

~~~
sokoloff
In the US, you have to present information for an I-9 form when starting a new
job. This is to prevent people without work authorization from working. The
penalties for an employer to skip this step or otherwise hire unauthorized
workers are very stiff. That's likely the reason for the restriction. It keeps
them in the bounds of the law for the US.

~~~
mikro2nd
Sounds like a reasonable guess, but strikes me as the lazy way out... other
sites (Amazon comes to mind) manage to find ways around similar issues with an
"I am not a US citizen/resident" option (which may or may not require
additional documentation for verification.)

They're certainly entitled to do whatever they want, but it looks to me like
opening up a significant opportunity for someone to clone their business model
in the rest of the world and beat them at their own game.

edit: spelign

~~~
rossdavidh
It could also be simply that this means they only have to (try to) keep up
with the law in one country, vs. many if they try to allow non-U.S. citizens.
If it's a one-person (or at least not-many-people) show then keeping up with
legal requirements/liabilities in one country is already a big deal.

------
antiquark
Somehow, I think she has different wage expectations than the average person:
_" I made over $2000 last year at freelance writing. Nearly half of it was
earned in the last quarter of the year."_

