California Hate Thread

[doc_loliday]

Here's the latest dispatch from the Workers' Paradise:


NY Times: California Supreme Court Deals Major Blow To Gig Economy Business Model, Treats Workers As Employees Rather Than Independent Contractors

In a ruling with potentially sweeping consequences for the so-called gig economy, the California Supreme Court on Monday made it much more difficult for companies to classify workers as independent contractors rather than employees.

The decision could eventually require companies like Uber, many of which are based in California, to follow minimum-wage and overtime laws and to pay workers’ compensation and unemployment insurance and payroll taxes, potentially upending their business models.

Industry executives have estimated that classifying drivers and other gig workers as employees tends to cost 20 to 30 percent more than classifying them as contractors. It also brings benefits that can offset these costs, though, like the ability to control schedules and the manner of work. ...

The gig economy/right to work in California has always struck me as antithetical to the democratic platform. They talk a good game about unions and employee rights, but California has consistently been on the side of the employer. I've been an "independent contractor" for large companies in CA, which was weird, considering I showed up to work at their buildings and literally had to pretend to the public that I worked for them.

[C-Mag]

Here's the latest dispatch from the Workers' Paradise:


NY Times: California Supreme Court Deals Major Blow To Gig Economy Business Model, Treats Workers As Employees Rather Than Independent Contractors

In a ruling with potentially sweeping consequences for the so-called gig economy, the California Supreme Court on Monday made it much more difficult for companies to classify workers as independent contractors rather than employees.

The decision could eventually require companies like Uber, many of which are based in California, to follow minimum-wage and overtime laws and to pay workers’ compensation and unemployment insurance and payroll taxes, potentially upending their business models.

Industry executives have estimated that classifying drivers and other gig workers as employees tends to cost 20 to 30 percent more than classifying them as contractors. It also brings benefits that can offset these costs, though, like the ability to control schedules and the manner of work. ...

The gig economy/right to work in California has always struck me as antithetical to the democratic platform. They talk a good game about unions and employee rights, but California has consistently been on the side of the employer. I've been an "independent contractor" for large companies in CA, which was weird, considering I showed up to work at their buildings and lierally had to pretend to the public that I worked for them.

This is big business stepping in to crush new smaller competitors. Regulations are in place to protect corporate interests.

[DBTrek]

Better to have unemployed than to have uncontrolled employed in California.

[Speaker to Animals]

The way we do employment is outdated as fuck. Tying health care to employment is one of the main reasons we are trapped with this system.

When I say capitalism is on its last legs, this is what I mean. We have fewer jobs for everybody, and the way we do employment necessitates all these benefits and other legal rights that hamper business and employment as well.

This gig model isn't really a bad idea as a place to start from, but it's totally antithetical to how we organize benefits and even health care in this country. Think of everything we have to change in order to make it work.

[Ex-California]

Here's the latest dispatch from the Workers' Paradise:


NY Times: California Supreme Court Deals Major Blow To Gig Economy Business Model, Treats Workers As Employees Rather Than Independent Contractors

In a ruling with potentially sweeping consequences for the so-called gig economy, the California Supreme Court on Monday made it much more difficult for companies to classify workers as independent contractors rather than employees.

The decision could eventually require companies like Uber, many of which are based in California, to follow minimum-wage and overtime laws and to pay workers’ compensation and unemployment insurance and payroll taxes, potentially upending their business models.

Industry executives have estimated that classifying drivers and other gig workers as employees tends to cost 20 to 30 percent more than classifying them as contractors. It also brings benefits that can offset these costs, though, like the ability to control schedules and the manner of work. ...

Its about the write-offs and the lack of tax money the state is allowed to collect

Don't be fooled for a second that they actually care about workers

[Fife]

The way we do employment is outdated as fuck. Tying health care to employment is one of the main reasons we are trapped with this system.

When I say capitalism is on its last legs, this is what I mean. We have fewer jobs for everybody, and the way we do employment necessitates all these benefits and other legal rights that hamper business and employment as well.

This gig model isn't really a bad idea as a place to start from, but it's totally antithetical to how we organize benefits and even health care in this country. Think of everything we have to change in order to make it work.

It can be done, and right here IRL, not just in fantasy land.

Rehabilitating Lochner
DEFENDING INDIVIDUAL RIGHTS AGAINST PROGRESSIVE REFORM


These are the good guys: http://ij.org/issues/economic-liberty/

Economic liberty—the right to earn a living in the occupation of your choice without unnecessary government interference—is at the heart of the American Dream. Unfortunately, all too many entrepreneurs find that this dream is under constant attack by unreasonable licensing, permitting and other requirements that stand in the way of honest competition. The mission of IJ’s economic liberty practice is to remove these barriers by persuading state and federal judges to take entrepreneurs’ constitutional rights seriously.

[TheReal_ND]

[Kath]

uh.... what? Checked on Zillow - it's a true story. Yikes.

[DBTrek]

Open Drug Use Has Exploded In San Francisco, Pushing The City's Liberal Image To The Limit



...Open drug use has exploded in San Francisco in recent years, enraging residents who complain of having to step over people injecting heroin in train stations and to traverse a seemingly unending series of tent villages on sidewalks and bike paths. The problem has ballooned into a public health crisis, officials say, leaving elected leaders scrambling for solutions as discarded needles pile up in the streets.

The issue has also tested San Francisco's image as a liberal, compassionate urban oasis, and underscores a broader trend in large California cities that have been grappling with rising homelessness and drug use on their streets.

Public drug use in San Francisco was thrust into the spotlight last week when a series of shocking videos uploaded to YouTube showed dozens of drug users, seemingly unaware that they were being filmed, sprawled out in a Bay Area Rapid Transit station and openly injecting drugs as commuters walked past. Others appeared to be unconscious, lying next to a pool of vomit. . .

. . .Complaints related to drug use in San Francisco have skyrocketed as well. Between 2009 and 2017, the number of reports of needles and other medical waste on the streets grew from 290 to 6,363 — an increase of 2,194% — according to the city’s database of non-emergency calls.

Complaints about human waste on the streets have also spiked, from 5,771 in 2009, to 20,960 in 2017, a jump of 363%. Since 2014, the number of reports has doubled. And complaints about encampments of homeless people have risen from 586 in 2009 to 42,208 in 2017 — a surge of almost 7,200%. . . .

https://www.buzzfeed.com/jimdalrympleii ... .eizVAjjKQ

And for bonus irony points . . . "Those needles littering the streets? The city gave them out"

[Ex-California]

New homes in CA to subsidize the Solar Industry

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/05/09/busi ... power.html

State officials and clean-energy advocates say the extra cost to home buyers will be more than made up in lower energy bills.