# Program on the sharing economy



## james4beach (Nov 15, 2012)

I haven't listened to the whole thing yet, but I found this episode of CBC's Ideas very interesting: "Platform capitalism, digital technology and the future of work". You can listen to it using these links:

https://www.cbc.ca/radio/ideas/plat...l-technology-and-the-future-of-work-1.4297369
https://www.cbc.ca/radio/podcasts/documentaries/the-best-of-ideas/

I think "sharing" and "gig" economy are misleading words meant to put a positive spin on a negative development in the economy. The employers (such as Uber) are violating legal and societal norms for employer/worker relationships, and dodging regulations meant to protect workers. The spin is meant to make this work sound freeing, leisurely and cool, whereas I think it's often (not always) abusive towards workers. An interesting quote that comes up in the program, 



> Before the Internet, it would be really difficult to find someone, sit them down for ten minutes and get them to work for you, and then fire them after those ten minutes. But with technology, you can actually find them, pay them the tiny amount of money, and then get rid of them when you don’t need them anymore.


I share the concern brought up in the program that this movement, overall, suppresses wages and deteriorates the rights of workers, especially those who work for lower wages.


----------



## james4beach (Nov 15, 2012)

For example, in the news today: Winnipeg-based company Skip the Dishes is facing a class action lawsuit for dodging employment standards: https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/manitoba/skip-the-dishes-lawsuit-1.4768467

This company (like many others in this sphere) tries to avoid callings its employees "employees". This lets it avoid Manitoba employment standards, such as rules for minimum wages, overtime and holidays.

With the loss of huge numbers of traditional long term jobs, workers are increasingly forced to take jobs like these ones. The least we can do is acknowledge that these disadvantaged people are employees, and treat them accordingly.


----------



## fireseeker (Jul 24, 2017)

You're 100% correct, J4B. As a society, we've forgotten the abuses that led to the creation of things like min wage laws, employment standards and unionization. Those correctives have been under steady attack since the 1980s. As a parent of a 20-y/o, I lament the working world we are handing to our children.


----------



## OnlyMyOpinion (Sep 1, 2013)

As a society, cheap seems to rule.
Call a cab, stay in a hotel, pick up your own bloody meal - or do without. 
It is people using uber, airbnb, skip-the-dishes and other cheap business models that allows them to exist.


----------



## james4beach (Nov 15, 2012)

OnlyMyOpinion said:


> As a society, cheap seems to rule.
> Call a cab, stay in a hotel, pick up your own bloody meal - or do without.
> It is people using uber, airbnb, skip-the-dishes and other cheap business models that allows them to exist.


I don't think it's fair to blame the users of the services.

Imagine that a new restaurant opened in town. Unlike the others, this one doesn't clean its kitchen and uses expired food items in its meal preparation. They avoid the health inspector and restaurant licensing by using little tricks. They find a way to classify their employees as non-employees. As a result, they use cheaper ingredients and cheaper labour -- so their end product is cheaper. Obviously, they will get customers because they can undercut everyone else (assuming the product is mostly OK).

*This is actually what many large corporations would do if it weren't for laws*. Words like "sharing economy" confuse the picture... this is just traditional capitalism. It's natural that a corporation that does not abide by laws and regulations achieves lower expenses and can provide cheaper products.

It's also not fair to all the competitors who are following the laws. Again, we've clouded the picture by framing this as some kind of technological advancement. It isn't about technology at all. Traditional taxi companies pay for all kinds of licensing and have to abide by labour standards. If a new taxi company opened up, didn't pay licensing, and didn't pay labour minimums required by law, then it could provide cheaper fares. This is exactly what Uber does.

The silicon valley companies are playing a sleight of hand trick on us. They want us to think that the innovations are technological. The only real innovation here is finding ways to avoid laws and regulations through weaknesses in our systems. One of their key innovations is navigating the modern labour market, and matching desperate workers with jobs in a way that comes off like entrepreneurship. They market a certain lifestyle.

It's an intriguing, novel achievement. But patch up those weaknesses in labour standards and licensing, and you'll find the silicon valley companies lose much of their competitive edge.


----------



## Big Kahuna (Apr 30, 2018)

james4beach said:


> I don't think it's fair to blame the users of the services.
> 
> Imagine that a new restaurant opened in town. Unlike the others, this one doesn't clean its kitchen and uses expired food items in its meal preparation. They avoid the health inspector and restaurant licensing by using little tricks. They find a way to classify their employees as non-employees. As a result, they use cheaper ingredients and cheaper labour -- so their end product is cheaper. Obviously, they will get customers because they can undercut everyone else (assuming the product is mostly OK).
> 
> ...


Meanwhile everybody cheers on tax (tariff) free trade with third world countries-it is like the public is ignorant of basic math.


----------



## kcowan (Jul 1, 2010)

Just look at the Calgary situation for Uber. They were given the green light provided they paid the same taxes as taxis, Uber took a pass.


----------



## 319905 (Mar 7, 2016)

Not to worry ... taxis/uber > self driving cars; cheap restaurants > automated; all those daily packaged salads, lunches, sandwiches made by new canadians > automated; and on and on. OT: I will draw the line at a pilot less plane. There's an old expression about bacon and eggs ... the chicken is involved, the pig is committed ... just saying.


----------



## Big Kahuna (Apr 30, 2018)

rikk2 said:


> Not to worry ... taxis/uber > self driving cars; cheap restaurants > automated; all those packaged salads, lunches, sandwiches made by new canadians > automated; and on and on. OT: I will draw the line at a pilot less plane. There's an old expression about bacon and eggs ... the chicken is involved, the pig is committed ... just saying.


This is why the big money interests are pushing so hard for Universal Basic Income-with UBI you can import an unlimited number of poor, unemployable humans-and they can all vote to bring in even more-Bernie Madoff would be proud.


----------



## richno (Aug 15, 2016)

Thanks for sharing this - love the program. 



james4beach said:


> I haven't listened to the whole thing yet, but I found this episode of CBC's Ideas very interesting: "Platform capitalism, digital technology and the future of work". You can listen to it using these links:
> 
> 
> I think "sharing" and "gig" economy are misleading words meant to put a positive spin on a negative development in the economy. The employers (such as Uber) are violating legal and societal norms for employer/worker relationships, and dodging regulations meant to protect workers. The spin is meant to make this work sound freeing, leisurely and cool, whereas I think it's often (not always) abusive towards workers. An interesting quote that comes up in the program,
> ...


----------



## OnlyMyOpinion (Sep 1, 2013)

Interesting documentary on the Passionate Eye recently about the sharing economy, or the Silicon Valley Disruptors as they call them. A lot of economic damage being done that is lining the pockets of the few 'innovators' who really don't give a ****.

Related to this (e.g. the displacement of long-term affortable rentals by airbnb) is a growing backlash in places like Venice against tourists overall. This is being compounded by the growing number of traveling boomers who have a 'bucket list' of places to check off. "Oh, we 'did' China and Italy this year".


----------



## kcowan (Jul 1, 2010)

I saw the episode. The problem is not airbnb but the crooks who use it. Similarly, Uber is a great solution but not for the unemployed. So it is the use of the technology. And its indiscriminate promotion by greedy people.


----------



## Just a Guy (Mar 27, 2012)

Funny, I wonder what would happen if they couldn't hire someone for the ten minutes because everyone refused to work for ten minutes only to be laid off. What if everyone insisted on working full time...that's how unions started. 

People seem to think they don't have power when, in reality, they give up their power willingly most of the time. Ironically, they then complain that they have no power.

Of course, everyone is now concerned that this is happening here in Canada now...no one was concerned in the 50's and 60's when we shipped labour overseas to china where this kind of abuse happened all the time. It didn't matter then as long as you got your cheap products that you threw out after using. 

None of this is new, it's a basic cycle that happens over and over throughout history. How we choose to deal with it will be interesting, but there are proven solutions out there.


----------



## milhouse (Nov 16, 2016)

rikk2 said:


> Not to worry ... taxis/uber > self driving cars; cheap restaurants > automated; all those daily packaged salads, lunches, sandwiches made by new canadians > automated; and on and on. OT: I will draw the line at a pilot less plane. There's an old expression about bacon and eggs ... the chicken is involved, the pig is committed ... just saying.


That's my view. Low skill jobs will always be at risk. 
I read somewhere that manufacturing that got send offshore for cheap labour is coming back onshore because of automation.


----------



## Longtimeago (Aug 8, 2018)

I am a firm believer in the idea that 'the people get what the people deserve'. I read some of the comments and it seems so obvious to me that they are missing the mark.

I abhor Airbnb and consider it a company that knowingly uses unethical business practices. The primary one is knowingly listing properties that are in fact illegal rentals. They hide behind the law by saying, 'we are only an online listing site. We tell those who list with us that they must insure they comply with all local laws.' That apparently means that even if they are made aware that a listing is for an illegal rental, they have no obligation to remove that listing, and they *don't* remove it.

The idea behind a 'bed and breakfast' or as Airbnb originally meant, an 'airbed and breakfast' is not new. Someone rents a spare room in their home or as in the case of the 2 guys who started Airbnb, blow up an airbed and put it on the floor in their apartment and offer it for rent when a major event in their city meant it was next to impossible to find a hotel room to rent. 

But when the public jumped on the Airbnb site and started booking because of the *lower prices*, regardless of whether hotel rooms were available or not, it became mainstream and went fro 2 guys with an airbed to a major corporation. That of course meant it went from something small to something driven purely by the profit over all other considerations, type business. That was bad enough but the next step was for 'speculators' to climb on board. They buy or rent multiple properties in a city like Paris and rent them all out by the night. They are not a B&B renting a room in their home, they are in fact running hotels. But without being restricted by things like health & safety laws that hotels have to adhere to.

Here though is where the people get what the people deserve comes into play and where the responsibility and yes blame for the wrongs lies. It is the consumer who is driving the bus and no one else. If the travelling public choose to do business with a company that allows such use of their site to happen, there will always be those ready to take advantage of that situation without any regard to whether what they are doing is ethically or morally right.

So I disagree with the idea as suggested by kcowan, " The problem is not airbnb but the crooks who use it." Or should I say I disagree with who the 'crooks who use it' really are, assuming kcowan meant the speculators with multiple listings etc rather than someone simply renting a room in their home as a B&B. It is the person making a booking who is the crook as much as it is anyone else. The only defense the travelling public has is to say, 'I didn't know about the issues with this business.' But once you are made aware of them, that defense no longer flies.

Here is the situation in Paris currently. https://www.travelandleisure.com/hotels-resorts/vacation-rentals/summer-airbnb-in-paris A whopping 85% plus of all listings are for illegal rentals. 

But as I said, it is the consumer driving this bus, no one else. There would not be *sixty-five thousand* listings in Paris on Airbnb if the demand by the consumer was not there to support that many. The average consumer wants something for nothing or as near to that as they can get. In other words price comes before any other consideration. When the consumer puts price before quality or service, they get what they deserve, an inferior product (ie. air travel in Economy class today) or an unethical product, etc.


----------



## kcowan (Jul 1, 2010)

Longtimeago said:


> So I disagree with the idea as suggested by kcowan, " The problem is not airbnb but the crooks who use it." Or should I say I disagree with who the 'crooks who use it' really are, assuming kcowan meant the speculators with multiple listings etc rather than someone simply renting a room in their home as a B&B. It is the person making a booking who is the crook as much as it is anyone else.


We have seen that even FB which claimed no responsibility over content, eventually came around. The problem with airbnb is that their business model was based on bypassing local laws. There are plenty of regulations for B&Bs that they just ignore. If airbnb insisted on adherence to local laws, their business model would quickly fall apart as you have illustrated.

I don't know the answer. Do you?


----------



## Longtimeago (Aug 8, 2018)

kcowan said:


> We have seen that even FB which claimed no responsibility over content, eventually came around. The problem with airbnb is that their business model was based on bypassing local laws. There are plenty of regulations for B&Bs that they just ignore. If airbnb insisted on adherence to local laws, their business model would quickly fall apart as you have illustrated.
> 
> I don't know the answer. Do you?


Well I'd say I know the answer but I don't see it happening anytime soon kcowan. The answer is for our culture to go back to one of honesty, integrity, fairness in our dealings with others and common decency, etc. But that hasn't been the norm since probably the 1950s. We now live in a culture that sees almost everything we do as being adversarial and about 'me' getting what I want at any cost and with total disregard to others.

One of my other pet peeves is air travel. The consumer has driven the price down and down by focusing on only that one thing. Then they complain that seat size has gotten smaller and smaller, add on costs for a pillow or drink or checking a bag, etc. have been added and it is all because in their opinion, the airlines just want to rip-off the passenger for profit. Well, airlines are made up of people. A company is not a living thing making decisions, people do that. But the blame is invariably placed on the airline alone, not the consumer who wants to pay as little as possible as well as the people in the airline who think just like the consumer does. Screw you, I come first.

Air travel today is actually half the cost it was 30 years ago in real dollars. https://www.theatlantic.com/busines...50-in-30-years-and-why-nobody-noticed/273506/ This quote in the article says it all, "It's the American way to want a product approaching first-class for a price approaching zero." Cultural selfishness.

As long as our culture thinks that way, the people will get what the people deserve. Lower quality, lower standards of service, disregard for the impact on others, etc.

I never understood why each generation seems to say, 'things were better back then', now I do.


----------



## Eclectic12 (Oct 20, 2010)

james4beach said:


> OnlyMyOpinion said:
> 
> 
> > As a society, cheap seems to rule.
> ...


Where they don't know about the tilted playing field ... sure.
Where they are informed about it but only care about price/perceived better access ... are they not supporting the violations of your seem concerned about?




james4beach said:


> ... It's an intriguing, novel achievement. But patch up those weaknesses in labour standards and licensing, and you'll find the silicon valley companies lose much of their competitive edge.


Where the customers are saying they want the weaknesses kept so that they can continue enjoying the current competitive advantage - where is the demand for change going to come from?


Cheers


----------



## OnlyMyOpinion (Sep 1, 2013)

I may be dead by the time it happens, but changes may eventually occur:

Airbnb's federal budget proposal tells Liberals: 'We want to be regulated' _In its five-page submission, the company (Airbnb) bluntly says: "We want to be regulated"... "We think as a platform our hosts should pay taxes. I know people get shocked when we say that, but we do. We think we should be contributing," Alex Dagg, Airbnb's public policy manager in Canada, said in an interview. "We just need to figure out what are the appropriate rules in place to do that and how can we facilitate that."

The Hotel Association of Canada argued it wasn't interested in targeting the casual home owner who rents out a room or unit for a few nights a year, instead putting a bull's-eye on hosts who rent out multiple homes or units for months on end as part of a larger commercial operation.
"We are not against Airbnb and we're not against the competition. Competition is, in fact, a good thing. What we're looking for here is fairness and a level playing field," said Alana Baker, the association's director of government relations._

http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/airbnb-want-to-be-regulated-1.4788017


----------



## Just a Guy (Mar 27, 2012)

The simple solution is to not use airbnb and let them go out of business. Of course, that will never happen and people will blame airbnb for taking advantage of things while silently supporting (condoning) them. 

There is an ethical issue I deal with in real estate all the time. I buy properties below market value, usually distressed, estate or foreclosure lately. I'm benefitting off the loss of another. Someone lost their house, investment, whatever due to a poor decision or many decisions... am I evil for doing so and providing affordable housing to others while making a profit?

Someone got stuck holding the bill, the old owner, the bank, cmhc, etc. I'm definitely profiting off the loss of others...


----------



## kcowan (Jul 1, 2010)

Longtimeago said:


> Well I'd say I know the answer but I don't see it happening anytime soon kcowan. The answer is for our culture to go back to one of honesty, integrity, fairness in our dealings with others and common decency, etc. But that hasn't been the norm since probably the 1950s. We now live in a culture that sees almost everything we do as being adversarial and about 'me' getting what I want at any cost and with total disregard to others.
> 
> One of my other pet peeves is air travel. The consumer has driven the price down and down by focusing on only that one thing. Then they complain that seat size has gotten smaller and smaller, add on costs for a pillow or drink or checking a bag, etc. have been added and it is all because in their opinion, the airlines just want to rip-off the passenger for profit. Well, airlines are made up of people. A company is not a living thing making decisions, people do that. But the blame is invariably placed on the airline alone, not the consumer who wants to pay as little as possible as well as the people in the airline who think just like the consumer does. Screw you, I come first.
> 
> ...


Yes I sympathize with the disgust at the ME generation. My Dad and Fil considered it a privilege to pay taxes for all the great services they got. That was before we discovered that our politicians are a bunch of crocks. Maybe it is the liberation of knowledge that is doing us in.



Just a Guy said:


> The simple solution is to not use airbnb and let them go out of business. Of course, that will never happen and people will blame airbnb for taking advantage of things while silently supporting (condoning) them.
> 
> There is an ethical issue I deal with in real estate all the time. I buy properties below market value, usually distressed, estate or foreclosure lately. I'm benefitting off the loss of another. Someone lost their house, investment, whatever due to a poor decision or many decisions... am I evil for doing so and providing affordable housing to others while making a profit?
> 
> Someone got stuck holding the bill, the old owner, the bank, cmhc, etc. I'm definitely profiting off the loss of others...


Yes but you did not cause it. In fact, by the time you got there, you were doing them a favour. It was the bank that lent money that was the root cause.

People seem to,think an opportunist is a bad person. I think they are smart and observant or insightful.


----------



## Just a Guy (Mar 27, 2012)

I remember a time when, if a politician's family memember committed a crime, they'd resign...then vandersam was elected in BC and maintained power while being charged...his replacements were no better for years...most ended in scandal. 

As for opportunists, what about having representation on the boards, seeing where important decisions about spending will force people into bankruptcy (gee the building needs a new roof, they've kept the condo fees too low, now it needs to be replaced and there is no money. If you don't do the cash call, the roof will fail for everyone, if you do the cash call, places will be foreclosed, the property values will decrease because there is a reserve shortage and major repairs, but as soon as the property sells, the arrears are paid by the bank, the building is more solvent, prices go up). Actually, you don't even have to be on the board to see this pattern if you have experience.


----------



## Eclectic12 (Oct 20, 2010)

Just a Guy said:


> ... There is an ethical issue I deal with in real estate all the time. I buy properties below market value, usually distressed, estate or foreclosure lately. I'm benefitting off the loss of another. Someone lost their house, investment, whatever due to a poor decision or many decisions... am I evil for doing so and providing affordable housing to others while making a profit?
> 
> Someone got stuck holding the bill, the old owner, the bank, cmhc, etc. I'm definitely profiting off the loss of others ...


Why would seeing an opportunity and taking advantage of it ... as a third party that didn't influence the bad decisions mean an ethical issue or make you evil?

For that, I would think you would need to have some sort of influence on the decisions, inflating expenses and/or interaction with the decision maker. By the time you are entering the picture - the mistakes have been made without your help or influence.


Cheers


----------

