By R. Brownell
1. It Would Stop Competition
The ability to become your own boss and work on your own terms is part of what makes these app based technology services so successful. Yet, progressives throughout the country have attempted to stop companies like Uber from classifying the individuals who opt into the business as “private contractors” and instead, classifies them as “full-time employees”.
This approach is also part of Hillary’s plan to stop these companies from creating “undercut wages”. An example of this approach has already been seen in California; according to syndicated columnist Megan McArdle:
“Uber has to worry about not just the expense of complying with all these mandates, but also the expense of documenting that it has complied with these mandates — which will mean more paperwork and hassle for Uber’s HR staff and for the drivers themselves. The effect would be to introduce a substantial wedge between what Uber spends to keep a driver on the road and what drivers actually get in their checks. How many people will still be driving when their work starts to be micromanaged and their checks are docked to pay for all the new requirements?”
2. Blocking Sharing Economy Fosters Union Protectionism
It is no secret that big business loves big government, and Hillary and Wall Street are two peas in a pod. Yet big business isn’t the only entity creating backroom deals with Democrats the likes of Clinton. Unions can be just as hazardous to a free and fair market.
An example of Unions attacking new capitalist outlets in the “sharing economy” was recently, when New York taxi unions pushed for legislation pushed a NYC city council bill that would put a cap on the number of Uber drivers which would be able to operate in the city. With big unions in bed with progressive candidates, the question should always be put forward as to whether or not the Democrats are really protecting the middle class consumers and entrepreneurs, or just serving union interests in eliminating competition?
3. Establishes New Labor Regulation That Stifles Entrepreneurialism
Progressive regulations on the economy don’t simply target corporations, they hit all business owners, big and small, just look at how the government treats hair braiders alone:
FreedomWorks CEO Adam Brandon issued a press release in the wake of Clinton’s economics speech:
“Hillary’s idea of creating jobs is to destroy the startup economy. Businesses like Uber, Airbnb, and Lyft thrive off of people being able to work when they can and not being over-regulated. Forcing these companies to provide full-time benefits and comply with overreaching laws not only hurts the employees but the people they serve…The solution is to cut regulations across the board, not to add more burdensome rules to protect unions and kill innovation.”
4. Property Rights Go Bye Bye
With the issue of Hillary’s socialist mantra seeping into the regulation she wishes to impose on companies like the ridesharing services Uber and Lyft, and even lodging company AIRBNB, it would only become a matter of time before more restrictions, regulation, and red tape start to take away your right to do with your property what you want, as seen in the case of the Arizona Llamas.
5. Putting a Cork on Innovation
Much like the argument made for how Net Neutrality would kill online and business innovation, consider why these services began in the first place; in order to fill a consumer need already existing products and services failed to produce or did not keep the edge on. By creating policies which would attack app based services for simply being successful, government is not only keeping people out of a job, but taking away the incentive to innovate, create, and advance ideas and technology which could change the lives of entire societies. Check out this video to have Milton Friedman explain in further detail:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g-6_xEfY3pM