Sviesta Ciba |

gnidrologs (

gnidrologs) rakstīja,
@ 2020-11-21 01:59:00

Lielais Restarts
"Amazon: profit up 100%
Walmart: profit up 80%
Target: profit up 80%
Lowe's: profit up 74%
Microsoft, Facebook, Apple, Google: stock at record high

Small businesses: 21% closed; revenue for rest down 30%. They're gonna go extinct in the lockdown without help."

(Lasīt komentārus) - (Ierakstīt jaunu komentāru)

	iokaste 2020-11-22 18:34 (saite)
	kas tas par Kalifornijas pašnodarbināto aizliegumu? (Atbildēt uz šo) (Iepriekšējais) (Diskusija)

extranjero
2020-11-22 19:34 (saite)

Bill AB5

Tas bija mērķēts uz Uber tipa pakalpojumiem, bet uzrakstīts tā, ka ietvēra faktiski visus pašnodarbinātos, kas strādā caur aģentūrām. Arī vairums tulkotāju frīlanseru strādā caur tulkošanas birojiem, tāpēc viņi Kalifornijā vairs nevarēja turpināt sadarbību.

Šobrīd, pateicoties lielām aktivitātēm, tulkotāji un vēl dažas kategorijas ir izslēgtas no šī likuma, un tā ir zināma uzvara.

Taču sliktākais ir tas, ka līdzīgi likumi tiek pieņemti citos štatos, un jau UK par to tiek domāts. Ar Latviju tas tieši nav saistīts, ja neskaita paredzētās izmaiņas, ka pašnodarbinātajiem būs jāmaksā nodokļi, pat ja nav ienākumu.

(Atbildēt uz šo) (Iepriekšējais)

extranjero
2020-11-22 19:39 (saite)

Sīkāk par to, kāpēc likums AB5 ir slikts, pastāstīts Skots Aleksandrs:

https://www.reddit.com/r/slatestarcodex/comments/j9kxl0/my_california_ballot_2020/

Last year California passed AB5, a law which reclassified most gig workers as employees. The intended targets were Uber and Lyft, who famously classify their drivers as gig workers rather than employees, exempting them from lots of labor regulations. The unintended targets were everyone else; for example, the state may have accidentally banned freelance journalism, photography, etc.

Uber and Lyft made some cosmetic changes and claimed the law didn't apply to them; California said it definitely did; it escalated to a point where Uber and Lyft threatened to suspend service in California; and finally it got tied up in court, with Uber and Lyft allowed to continue employing gig workers until a final decision comes down sometime next year. Prop 22 is backed by Uber and Lyft, and lets them ignore AB5.

I really hate AB5. It enshrines all the worst parts of the modern economy - inflexibility, you have to have exactly one employer who controls your entire life, health insurance is tied to employment, nobody can choose their own hours or working conditions. It throws independent professionals under the bus in favor of everyone having to be a corporate drone of the exact same government-approved kind.

And there's the libertarian aspect - it bans people from making mutually beneficial contracts on whatever terms they want, in favor of having to do things the exact government-approved way. If you look at any literature from before the 1970s, it shows that almost any able-bodied person who wanted a job could get one within a few days just by asking around and walking into the first place that wanted them. I don't know all the changes that led to our current dystopia of endless resumes, applications, and disappointments, but I suspect it was the government transforming employment from "sure, let this person do some work for you for a while" to "oh, you employed this person? now you have two thousand different obligations to them that you can never get out of". The government has tried to create a faux social services net funded by people's employers, but it turns out businesses are happy to have workers but less happy to have social service dependees. The solution is for the government to fund its own damn social services and stop hanging more and more things on the employer-employee relationship.

But Uber and Lyft are great. Some of my mentally-ill patients who could never get an official employee job at a fast food place or something now have jobs with Uber and Lyft that they can feel really proud of and use to support themselves or supplement support from the government or their family. Anyone who's taken an Uber or Lyft knows that they're the first destination for new immigrants who get excluded from traditional employment. Or you've probably also met the single mothers who say they were never able to have a job before because they needed to be home at X, Y, and Z time for child care, but now that they're gig workers who can choose their own hours it's let them get back into the workforce and help support their families. It really feels like the same sort of situation you read about in pre-1970 books - a place where anyone, even if they're poor or disadvantaged or foreign, can get a job and earn an honest living for themselves in a way that the rest of the economy has completely dropped the ball on. I want to support these people, and the only polling I know of suggests most ride share drivers support Prop 22.

(Atbildēt uz šo) (Iepriekšējais) (Diskusija)

extranjero
2020-11-22 19:39 (saite)

And Uber and Lyft have also really earned my trust and respect. Five years ago I worked in a clinic that wasn't on any of the public bus routes. Some of my poorer patients didn't have cars, and it would take them hours to get to my office, and sometimes they would miss some crucial public transportation step and not be able to make their appointments at all. Sometimes if they were desperate they would take a taxi, which would charge them through the nose and take its sweet time getting there. This was right when Uber and Lyft were expanding to Michigan, I was usually the first person to tell them about it, and it changed some of these people's lives. It's really easy for privileged people who own their own transportation to dismiss ride-sharing as a luxury, but if you don't have a car, you used to have severely limited mobility. Now you can get anywhere in town for a quick $5 Uber ride.

In a world of quickly-closing opportunities, Uber and Lyft are this rare bright spot, where uncredentialled blue-collar workers excluded from most positions can get flexible jobs with whatever hours they want, and where poor people who were previously locked out of most of the world can get anywhere they need to be for cheap. So of course California is trying to destroy them. It's the most California thing ever to California.

(Atbildēt uz šo) (Iepriekšējais) (Diskusija)

	iokaste 2020-11-22 20:18 (saite)
	Paldies par info. un kāda būtu tava nostāja par problēmām(?) ar pašnodarbināto nodokli Latvijā. proti to dziesmu, ka pensijai nesakrās utt. (Atbildēt uz šo) (Iepriekšējais) (Diskusija)

extranjero
2020-11-22 20:26 (saite)

Es noteikti atbalstu UK sistēmu, kur nav šādu ikmēneša maksājumu. Ir tikai maksājums par gadu, un ienākuma nodoklis ir tāds pats kā darbiniekiem, bet sociālais ir 9%, kas laikam ir vienāds ar darbinieka maksāto sociālu. Maksājumos iztrūkst darba devēja maksātā nodokļa daļa, bet pašnodarbinātie arī nesaņem apmaksātas slimības lapas, atvaļinājumus utt., tāpēc domāju, ka tas ir taisnīgi.

Nav īsti pamata bažīties par pensijām. Viens mans paziņa Latvijā, kurš ilgi bija strādājis kā pašnodarbinātais tulkotājs, nesen aizgāja pensijā. Acīmredzot ar viņa nodokļu maksājumiem bija pietiekami. Varbūt viņš arī izveidojis iekrājumus, to tik sīki nezinu. Bet šobrīd, kovida laikā, viņš ar velosipēdu ceļo pa Kipru un ir ar dzīvi apmierināts.

Es domāju, ka tie, kas nespēj daudz nopelnīt kā pašnodarbinātie, diez vai pēkšņi atradīs labi apmaksātu darbu, ja viņiem aizliegt būt pašnodarbinātiem. Visdrīzāk rezultāts būs, ka viņi vairāk dzīvos uz pabalstiem, un neviens nebūs ieguvējs – ne šie cilvēki, ne arī valsts.

(Atbildēt uz šo) (Iepriekšējais) (Diskusija)

	iokaste 2020-11-22 21:04 (saite)
	Paldies par viedokli! (Atbildēt uz šo) (Iepriekšējais)

(Lasīt komentārus) -

Navigate: