Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

California is on the verge of driving out another business
American Thinker ^ | August 13, 2020 | Andrea Widburg

Posted on 08/13/2020 8:44:09 AM PDT by lasereye

Once upon a time, California was the Golden State, a shining example of how America should be run. Then the Democrats took over. Since then, the state has gone downhill fast.

One of the worst things the state assembly did just last year was to pass legislation that effectively killed the “gig economy” (i.e., people who enjoy freelance work that enables them to control their own time). Now, thanks to that law, the lockdowns, and a problematic judicial decision, California has another hit coming: Uber’s pulling out.

California’s AB 5 went into effect on January 1. Although ostensibly meant to protect employees, the law was instead a massive gift to unions. This is because the law effectively made it impossible for companies both inside and inside of California to employ independent contractors. Suddenly, a whole host of people found themselves unemployable. The newly unemployed included freelance journalists and musicians, independent truckers, and, significantly, drivers for app-based businesses such as Uber, Lyft, and DoorDash.

Initially, Uber, Lyft, and DoorDash vowed to keep doing business in California. What they hadn’t counted on, though, was the extra whammy of California’s response to the Wuhan virus. The state locked down, then it partially unlocked, and then it locked down again. The state is apparently caught in an infinite loop that sees it futilely battling the virus even as it successfully wipes out the economy.

The last straw was a recent judicial decision saying that the drivers for these ride-hailing businesses are employees entitled to the full panoply of benefits under California law. With the California economy in tatters, and a hostile judicial ruling, Uber’s CEO has finally had enough and announced that the company is pulling up stakes in the state

(Excerpt) Read more at americanthinker.com ...


TOPICS: Business/Economy; Government; US: California
KEYWORDS: ab5; doordash; gigeconomy; lyft; uber
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-34 next last

1 posted on 08/13/2020 8:44:09 AM PDT by lasereye
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: lasereye

I am waiting to see what happens to public employees’ pensions. They already have massive unfunded liabilities and it’s only a matter of time in which such people are told that you might as well forget about seeing a dime from them. All of this not dissimilar from what happened in the Soviet Union and East Bloc.


2 posted on 08/13/2020 8:47:53 AM PDT by OttawaFreeper ("The Gardens was founded by men-sportsmen-who fought for their country" Conn Smythe, 1966)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: OttawaFreeper

The poker hand is in Biden’s election. Make the other 49 states bail out Calif.


3 posted on 08/13/2020 8:53:55 AM PDT by George from New England
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: OttawaFreeper
I am waiting to see what happens to public employees’ pensions.


4 posted on 08/13/2020 8:55:22 AM PDT by null and void (Quarantine the sick. Shield the vulnerable. Free everyone else!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: OttawaFreeper

California public employees’ pensions are insanely bloated. They are bloated because the unions and California democrats have engaged for decades in a game of overpromising, corrupt accounting, and kicking the can down the road. This has been done in plain sight. The only innocents in the room are those few who have tried to blow the whistle and call for reform. But the political system in California is corrupt. It knew exactly what it was doing, it knew that it was not sustainable, and it is now demanding a federal bailout.

No bailouts. We should not be paying off crooks and thieves out of pity for the mess they knowingly created.

Write down California’s public employee pensions to whatever level is actuarily sustainable. If that means cutting them by 50 percent, so be it. California public employees will still be getting a better pension than most of the serfs whose taxes are paying for their inflated salaries and benefits.


5 posted on 08/13/2020 8:55:58 AM PDT by sphinx
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: null and void

Lake Berryessa!


6 posted on 08/13/2020 8:56:38 AM PDT by Steely Tom ([Seth Rich] == [the Democrats' John Dean])
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: lasereye
. Although ostensibly meant to protect employees, the law was instead a massive gift to unions. This is because the law effectively made it impossible for companies both inside and inside of California to employ independent contractors.

And the number one reason was to make sure independent contractors weren't falling through the tax crack.

7 posted on 08/13/2020 8:57:20 AM PDT by SKI NOW
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Steely Tom

Bingo!!!


8 posted on 08/13/2020 9:09:45 AM PDT by SierraWasp (MASA (Make America Straight Again!!!))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Steely Tom

Are you The Zodiac?


9 posted on 08/13/2020 9:18:01 AM PDT by A_Former_Democrat (See St George's Rap Sheet . . . TAG PedoJoe with "DEFUND the POLICE")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: sphinx

“California public employees’ pensions are insanely bloated”

Not just CA. MY wifes family are 90% firefighters in Ohio-nepotism at its finest.

Her cousin few years back retired as Fire Chief at 130,000 per year pension. He is 56 or 57. He just started another job for the state in arson control $90k per year.

The coward cop in Parklands retirement was 110k per year


10 posted on 08/13/2020 9:30:29 AM PDT by setter
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: setter

I work routinely with law enforcement investigators here in Kommifornia and they all brag about the fact that they can retire with a full pension then move to another municipality or to a state position and collect a double or even triple pension after just a few years on the new job. These loopholes need to be plugged.


11 posted on 08/13/2020 9:36:33 AM PDT by Intar
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Intar

Teachers do the same thing. Retire at age 53 then go teach at another school.

Gov’t employees should have to work until age 62 before collecting pension.


12 posted on 08/13/2020 9:39:02 AM PDT by setter
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: OttawaFreeper

“I am waiting to see what happens to public employees’ pensions.”

Wailing and gnashing of teeth!


13 posted on 08/13/2020 9:50:11 AM PDT by Rebelbase
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: null and void

Perfect.


14 posted on 08/13/2020 9:50:58 AM PDT by CodeToad (Arm Up! They Have!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: AdmSmith; AnonymousConservative; Arthur Wildfire! March; Berosus; Bockscar; cardinal4; ColdOne; ...

15 posted on 08/13/2020 10:03:43 AM PDT by SunkenCiv (Imagine an imaginary menagerie manager imagining managing an imaginary menagerie.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: lasereye
California is doing much worse that driving out another business. In essence what they have done is pick winners and losers. That is not just Uber and Lyft being the losers, but just as importantly the little guy driving his car, paying his expenses and trying to earn a profit. Look upon them as small businesses that happen to be outsourcing market and sales to Uber. California's decision leads to an entire list of problems.

1.) At the macro-level it is a deterrent to all businesses looking to operate in CA. Business owners must wonder are they to be chosen as a winner or a loser in the future. The only way to insure that you are a winner is that you pay lobbyists, who in turn pay off politicians. Effectively this is a protection racket being run by government. It is worse that the old mafia's protection racket because the mob never had the force of law, as in legislation, on their side.

2.) This decision deters entrepreneurship. Risk is at the heart of entrepreneurial endeavors. The magnitude can always be measured on the personal level. There is an opportunity cost associated with business decisions. You must forego something when deciding on another. The little Uber driver is an entrepreneur, running his own business. He made decisions to not do something to be an Uber driver. He may have left a job for instance. Choices such as these have consequences, and now everyone involved is feeling the pain because of something they could not control. Uber, the company, is an entrepreneurial endeavor itself. It created a new business model. While ride services are not sexy, Uber chose that line of business over others. They took investor's money to develop business in CA. And now those who used their hard earned capital to invest in an entrepreneurial venture will feel the pain, or perhaps not achieve as high of an ROI that could have been possible. This is through no fault of their own. The bottom line, CA messed with people's personal choices and now the people have to feel the pain. Which leads to:

3.) CA's decision deters investment.

4.) While my personal assessment of making money in the gig economy is rather negative, I have recognized through my daughter's friends that it is about much more than making money. If taken seriously, it is running a small business. This is perhaps the most valuable thing that Uber and Lyft offer drivers. It's an education in business. There are fundamental lessons that can be learned and latter applied to other business startups. This is another play on stifling entrepreneurship, but in a different manner. It takes away very valuable learning experiences. Fewer people will have the experience of failure, or maybe success, that aids in starting a new business. Failure in my estimation is probably more important that success. Bottom line, this means fewer small businesses in CA because one of the avenues to gaining experience to start a business is now gone. This also means fewer businesses in the future that would hire employees. Read that as unemployment.

5.) Another problem with CA's decision is that it at it's core anti-competitive, which in turn is anti-capitalistic. In economic terms, pure competition relies on a.) many competitors b.) delivering a homogeneous product or service, with c.) perfect information (knowledge of supply/demand, prices, etc.) There is more to this, but I will spare you the econ lesson. What is important to know is that Uber and Lyft increased competition and that is a good thing. For years government sold concessions, licenses, etc. to taxi drivers/companies. Taxi companies had a monopoly or in some cases an oligopoly. CA's decision takes it right back to that. So besides being bad Econ 101, what impact does that have? After all, maybe some of those Uber drivers could drive taxi. The problem is government created monopolies that in turn delivered an inferior product at a controlled price - controlled by some government regulatory body. Bottom line, that is bad for consumers - they get an over-priced, piss poor product. Increased competition leads to better products and services, at better prices to meet the needs of more consumers. In this case, citizens of CA. They should be hopping mad, but I doubt they will be given their record of voting for the Rat bastards.

I feel it's important to point out the bright side of CA's decision. If you're a lazy ass government employee in CA you're still sitting pretty on the side that gets to pick winners and losers. (That is dripping with sarcasm for the slow folks, since so many don't have a sense of humor.)

16 posted on 08/13/2020 10:07:18 AM PDT by ConservativeInPA ("War is peace. Freedom is slavery. Ignorance is strength." - George Orwell, 1984)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: lasereye

I’m sure there’s a huge exception for H1B contractors.


17 posted on 08/13/2020 10:15:17 AM PDT by Sirius Lee (They are openly stating that they intend to murder us. Prep if you want to live.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ConservativeInPA

California’s stupid law is a disgrace, but there’s really nothing “entrepreneurial” about an Uber driver. Uber is nothing more than an app for gypsy cabs, when you think about it. A real entrepreneur would build on this model or come up with an entirely new idea.


18 posted on 08/13/2020 10:25:03 AM PDT by Alberta's Child ("We're human beings ... we're not f#%&ing animals." -- Dennis Rodman, 6/1/2020)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: A_Former_Democrat

I measure angles in radians.


19 posted on 08/13/2020 10:30:21 AM PDT by Steely Tom ([Seth Rich] == [the Democrats' John Dean])
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: lasereye
Oh no... Uber is leaving California! How will Liberals get food delivered... Maybe they'll starve to death becau se they don't know how to carry out... 😋
20 posted on 08/13/2020 10:35:40 AM PDT by Deplorable American1776 (Proud to be a DeplorableAmerican with a Deplorable Family...even the dog is, too. :-) Trump 2020)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-34 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson