I think we are destined to agree to disagree. Evidence has shown that people will be economically coerced into contracts, or are not educated enough to understand the consequences of the contract (gig drivers not knowing how little they're making) and the social services currently do not exist to protect them, nor are they likely to be spun up.
Sure, journalists get the short end of the stick, as well as gig workers who don't need the income and just want to do it part time. Edge cases are unfortunate.
Creating a robust social safety net and well-paying jobs is substantially more complex (or, in actuality, impossible in this country) than just banning the employee-as-contractor fraud.
This is exactly the attitude that creates large unmaintainable codebases that are layers of hacks upon hacks. There is an alternative and that is to hire people to do the job that are competent in wrangling complexity and refactoring the system in question.
No, that's not the case at all. You need buy in from interested parties, which you don't have in politics, and if you have a large unmaintainable codebase, you probably don't have from the people in charge.
So everyone should suffer until those exist because businesses are permitted to take advantage of them?
I'm spending low six figures annually on political donations to those who support universal healthcare. I still support shims like this until it gets here. Sorry I'm not fixing it fast enough for you.
AB 5 has everyone suffering. Consider this for a moment, Silicon Valley: the Tiger Teams you contract to pull your fat out of the fire when your infrastructure starts melting down, well you can’t hire them under AB 5 if they are California-based. Persons (which includes Corporations) cannot be independently contracted to produce your main line of business. And when your business is Tech and so it theirs...
> So everyone should suffer until those exist because businesses are permitted to take advantage of them?
That's exactly the point. Everyone wasn't suffering and in dire need of rescue by the state of California. Now, we have a law that hasn't helped the people it was supposed to help and has put quite a few legitimate businesses out of work. Good intentions or not, AB 5 is worse than the old status quo.
Why? not everyone needs an overlarge and authoritarian government baby sitting them.
We became great as a nation without having to rely on a nanny-state to "protect" those poor poor people who are "obviously" unable to do it themselves...
True! And in 1875, do you know what happened if you got hurt on the job? They left you for dead because there was no consequence in doing that. Maybe if they were nice they would drag you back to town to see the doctor first.
But then you couldn't work anymore, and so you died or begged for charity.
The nation was built on the fact that if you became unable to work, or were never able to work at all, you were discarded by society.
I don't want to live in a society that discards people because they can't work.
Sure, journalists get the short end of the stick, as well as gig workers who don't need the income and just want to do it part time. Edge cases are unfortunate.