Jim Edwards @Jim_Edwards 9h9 hours ago More evidence that the gig economy is actually making people poorer
Without the "gig economy" a lot of those in the self-employed category might otherwise be unemployed. That makes the statistics misleading when you simply don't include all the people earning zero.
Gig economy is basically a euphemism for "you were displaced by international cheap labor and you run around trying to make ends meet". This statement might appear as extremist opinion if you don't live in rust belt. One of my family member frequents rust belt where a big manufacturer was trying to reduce cost by shifting manufacturing overseas. Entire town moves to driving uber or looking for jobs on craigslist. The gig economy thus further undercuts itself by over supplied unskilled labor. However, all the big corporations and offshorers need to put a sugar coat on this mess and hence they call it a gig economy. It actually is a dog eat dog economy where labor competes with each other in rush to push labor cost to zero. That is result of globalization i.e. with open borders, labor in USA will get paid same as in third world. Gig economy is just the way process gets expedited. Corporations now can say "Americans are busy in gig economy and Americans don't want to work hard or are educated enough hence we need more work visas" and still appear legit. Why else do you think suddenly the Exelon, Goldman, Google and other big corporations have started screaming knowing that Trump will curb work visas also?
Now when we interview for the next gig, the panel consist of H1B visa holders. On rare occasion they would recommend to hire a westerner. I have check with associates and they have exactly the same experience.
Gig economy is about creating income equality all over the world by making every one in West poor, for the benefit of corporations, Soros and Clinton like elites.
I work my ass off for 40 hours per week, and along with my job, I also do half the job my subordinate is supposed to do. My subordinate works 40 hours per week and does half of what he is supposed to do, since I am doing the other half. We both get paid $50,000 per year. Explain to me where the income inequality is? It is with the subordinate, who does less work for same amount of pay. It is the subordinate who should get less pay, not the tougher worker who does not deserve a raise. That may be perceived as income inequality. I call it "Honest pay for honest work." Dunno' what everyone is all on about. Honest pay for honest work. Seems easy enough.
It's interesting how anti-globalization used to be a rallying cry for the left wing hippies. Now it's for the right.