4 thoughts on “Hot Take: The “sharing economy””

    1. Pretty good piece. But what I do not understand is this – once unemployment gets low, then shouldn’t labour get scarce and more people can reject precarious work and ask for higher wages? Not that it solves the problem but here in Toronto unemployment is much higher than SF and there is surplus labour to keep wages low and keep the terms of unemployment at the advantage of owners of businesses/capital.

  1. Can you come up with another name for essentially businesses using personal assets (homes, cars, etc) based on internet/app technology that eliminates the need for middlemen and brokers?

    Frankly, I loathe the idea of some company with a “Winner take all” benefit of these technologies taking 20% or more of revenue while the people using their cars make little or nothing per hour and just don’t realise the full costs of providing this service. Meanwhile the taxi industry in Toronto has been horrible – remember about 15 years ago when they finally tightened the rules because most cabs were unsafe former police cars that were dirty and falling apart?

    Some degree of licensing and regulation is important, the the taxi plates were never meant to be investments for retirees and the idea was not to limit competition so that the value of these plates were preserved by limiting the issuing of new plates. Toronto is one of the most expensive cities for taxis in North America, the customer loses and Adam Smith is turning over in his grave that we allow such regulation that hark back to the things he complained about.

    The deal worked out with Uber seems to benefit Uber and plate owners, and doesn’t help taxi drivers or protect consumers (it lowers training for drivers)… the worst of both worlds.

Leave a Reply