Corporate nullification

But everyone loves them some Ubers.

In February, Airbnb chief executive Brian Chesky compared his firm’s defiance of local housing ordinances with that of Gandhi’s passive resistance to British rule. Meanwhile, a tweeter compared Uber to Rosa Parks, defying unjust laws. Chesky quickly backed down after widespread mockery. Companies acting out of self-interest comparing themselves with the noble heroes of civil rights movements is as absurd as it is insulting.

But there is a better analogy from the US civil rights era for law-flouting firms of the on-demand economy. It’s just not the one corporate leaders claim. They are engaged in what we call “corporate nullification”, following in the footsteps of Southern governors and legislatures in the United States who declared themselves free to “nullify” federal law on the basis of strained and opportunistic constitutional interpretation.

Clever. What we need now is a map that marks Airbnb locations with little Confederate flag icons. 

On today's episode of Hillary Clinton Is The Worst

While we're still figuring out how much fun we had at poor Bernie Sanders' expense last weekend (much of it deserved.. more on that later),  now is a good time to remind ourselves that Hillary Clinton Is The Worst.

Bill Clinton’s overhaul of the welfare system, which was passed in conjunction with a Republican-controlled Congress, replaced a major federal welfare program with block grants to states, required adults to find a job within two years of receiving aid, placed a five-year limit on aid, blocked future legal immigrants from welfare assistance, and cut $24 billion in food stamps. It was denounced by many Democrats, including Peter Edelman, who resigned from his post at the Department of Health and Human Services, arguing that the law would do “serious injury to American children.”

The rest of that article is a series of snippets in which Hillary is being the worst person to families her husband was cutting off of welfare. My favorite parts are when later Senator Clinton starts talking about "deadbeats."

In an April 2002 interview with the Gettysburg Times, then-Senator Clinton reiterated the impetus behind her husband’s effort to “substitute dignity for dependence.” At the time, Congress was considering the reauthorization the 1996 law.

“There were people in the White House who said, ‘just sign anything,’ you know,’ the New York senator said in an interview. ‘And I thought that was wrong. We wanted to do it in a way that kept faith with our goals: End welfare as we know it, substitute dignity for dependence, but make work pay.’”

In that same interview, Clinton also said that people who had moved from welfare to work were “no longer deadbeats.”

“Now that we’ve said these people are no longer deadbeats—they’re actually out there being productive—how do we keep them there?”

To put it bluntly, Hillary Clinton doesn't care about poor people. She doesn't care how many she has to throw to the wolves to get elected.

Today, she was asked some pointed questions about the emergence of the "gig" economy where wolves like Uber and Taskrabbit take advantage of the desperation of underemployed people with no social benefits. These over-capitalized start-ups are sinking a lot of money into political advertising this year so candidates may be wary of offending them. Her answer, predictably, was a dodge.

Today @HillaryClinton got asked if she supported the idea of a #basicincome due to automation. This was her response. pic.twitter.com/QMHsLks3gV

— Scott Santens (@2noame) July 21, 2015

The question really wasn't about the ACA. But it's important to emphasize that the "innovation" she doesn't want to stifle is these companies' ability to exploit vulnerable and therefore pliable and cheap labor. That's what the "gig" economy is. And that scheme can't operate if we get too many "deadbeats" running around with no imperative to feed it.

The feudal sharing economy

At least they're starting to admit who they are.

The "vision" of Mr Brian Chesky, the celebrated CEO of the other billionaire new kid on the block of the sharing economy: AirBnb, comes very close to this new feudalism. That's what he said in an interview reported by Venture Beat: "In essence, Brian Chesky wants a world more like the villages of old: highly trusting and filled with micro-entrepreneurs who shared their assets to make a living. Cities used to be generally villages, and everyone was essentially kind of like an entrepreneur,” he told a packed room at the Atlantic Aspen Ideas Festival. “You were either a farmer, or you worked in the city as a blacksmith, or you had some kind of trade. And then the Industrial Revolution happened". Just put the word "serf" where he uses "entrepreneur", and you've got the whole picture. He likes this world so much, this is our bright future in his vision, with the multitude being those micro serfs depending on the moods of the Lord of the Village, Brian Chesky himself of course

Today the front pages of your local newspapers are trumpeting the city council's recent licensing of UberX to operate in Orleans Parish.  Everyone is very gung-ho.

City officials have said they would be able to start processing applications from ride-hailing services as soon as the regulations become law.

“We are stepping out of our comfort zone and leading on a cutting-edge issue,” Councilman Jared Brossett, who drafted the regulations along with Councilwoman Susan Guidry, said in a statement. “This law strikes the right balance. It serves the needs of our citizens and visitors in adding a new high-tech model to complement our traditional for-hire industry. The bottom line is that this will lead to a strengthened transportation environment for all.”

But the so-called Sharing Economy is, by its very nature, not built to "serve the needs of our citizens."  Unless, you limit your concept of "our citizens" to the very wealthy which Susan Guidry and Jared Brossett very well might. 

Covering the latest app has become commonplace because it’s the latest thing, and therefore it must be cool and life-changing. While it’s “cool” to most of the world, it’s only “life-changing” to those who can shell out the cash for the lifestyle—which is a lot of the journalists writing about them.

Matter’s Lauren Smiley, who lives in the building in which her story is set, referred to these apps’ users as members of the “Shut-In Economy.” The piece describes them as aware of their #whitepeopleproblems, but unapologetically so. “Basically, people a lot like herself,” Smiley wrote, referring to a woman who epitomized this new economy: the class of men and women who are late 20s to early 30s, have a high income and use on-demand services without batting an eye. “That’s the common wisdom: The apps are created by the urban young for the needs of urban young.” Last week, New York Magazine’s Annie Lowrey took it a step further and lived with only these modern conveniences for two weeks. Her piece was slapped with a painfully tone-deaf headline: “Will the New Concierge Economy Mean the End of the Errand?"

Of course not. For the vast majority of us, the inconvenience of running errands doesn’t outweigh the financial costs of doing it ourselves.

High income 20 and 30 somethings. Those are the only people who have any representation in city government these days. Even if those aren't the people who actually live here, they do comprise the population New Orleans's political class aspires to represent.  We've only been slightly more successful than Baton Rouge at affecting this demographic change.  But just look at how sad it makes them.

The parish's birth rate and international migration basically carried the area's population growth. And according to Louisiana demographer Elliott, Stonecipher, that's not good.

International migration, it's safe to assume, is mostly derived from Latin America, he said -- mainly from Mexico. These newcomers mostly work in low-wage jobs, and in many cases are not in the country legally. Therefore, they pay little or no taxes.

"That's why you hear politicians (talk of attracting) quality in-migrants," Stonecipher said. "It's not a value judgment."

Leaders of most metropolitans, and especially in Baton Rouge, actively seek to attract young, educated professionals who are currently busting at the seams in places like Austin, Texas, to grow and maintain their tax base.

While population data for Baton Rouge might appear to reflect younger, quality migrants, Stonecipher said it's not likely the case. Hispanic migrants tend to be younger and of childbearing age, so international migration growth can be easily confused to suggest growth of quality, domestic migrants.

You really have to feel for these "metropolitan leaders." They're trying to select a better quality of people to serve but keep ending up with all these dang Mexicans.  This is literally the complaint they are making. Seems like democracy was supposed to work the other way around. But who knows anymore.

In any case, they're probably too quick to dismiss their competitive advantage since "concierge apps" are only possible when you have a ready supply of cheap and desperate labor to feed them.

There are still only twenty-four hours in a day. When “downtime” is turned into work time, and that work time is unpredictable and low-paid, what happens to personal relationships? Family? One’s own health?

Other proponents of on-demand work point to studies, such as one recently commissioned by Uber, showing Uber’s on-demand workers to be “happy.”

But how many of them would be happier with a good-paying job offering regular hours?

An opportunity to make some extra bucks can seem mighty attractive in an economy whose median wage has been stagnant for thirty years and almost all of whose economic gains have been going to the top.

That doesn’t make the opportunity a great deal. It only shows how bad a deal most working people have otherwise been getting.

And maybe this is the future of regionalism in South Louisiana.  Nobody actually lives in Orleans Parish but it's a swell place to vacation (or own property if you can afford it.)  So get yourself to NOLA, luxury citizen! While you're there you can call on a vast army of chauffeurs and errand do-ers to keep you comfortable simply by punching some buttons on your phone. They live just outside the city or just up I-10 a bit.

Of course, when you do get here,  you'll need a place to stay and/or rent out at too damn high prices.  The city council is working on that for you too.