The Sharing Economy Fights Back Against Regulators

An anonymous reader writes in with a story about the advocacy group "Peers". The group says their goal is to “mainstream, protect, and grow the sharing economy.” "The growth of the 'sharing economy,' a loosely defined term generally referring to the internet-enabled peer-to-peer exchanges of goods, has brought with it a shift in the way we think about consumption. Its rise has been fast, and loud. What started with a few enterprising individuals willing to let complete strangers sleep in their homes and use their possessions has now developed into a formidable economic force that threatens to upend several different industries. Along the way, it has posed some major legal challenges. The companies that are pushing it forward have continually undermined local ordinances, consumer safeguards, and protectionist regulations alike. As a result, governments around the country are trying to reign them in. That’s where Silicon Valley’s newest advocacy group comes in."

Race to the Bottom

[Gr8Apes]

The "Sharing Economy" is a race to the bottom. The people engaged are selling time and use of the only things they have left (houses, cars, and their personal time) for money to people still working because they cannot find a job that pays enough. It's people hanging onto a shard of what they used to have while renting out the rest. This can only implode, and the faster it grows, the bigger the implosion will be.

The predictions of the 40s and 50s about the future are coming true - robotics will do most menial labor, people will have more free time, except that free time is not evenly divided up among the population. There's the group working 80-120 hour weeks, and the unemployed or sub 20 hours per week minimum wage slave. That will continue until there are not enough consumers to support the people working, and then more layoffs ensue, until we're back in the serfdom and squalor of a good middle ages city with a wealthy elite and beggars and almost no one else in between.

OK, maybe that's a little extreme and apocalyptic view of the future, but where we're going is somewhere between now and there unless some major things change. Automation will remove more manual labor and service type jobs going forward, and there really won't be anything replacing it.

Re:Reminds me of Food Trucks

[Stormy Dragon]

Oh my god, people are doing things I wouldn't do! I demand men in uniforms be sent to make them stop, through the use of physical violence if necessary! I'm just not prepared to live in a world where everyone isn't forced to be exactly like me.

Re:Reminds me of Food Trucks

[Antipater]

Where do you live, that food trucks are so predatory? The vast majority of food trucks I've seen hang out around office parks at lunchtime and bars at night. In both situations, they're stealing customers really only from fast food chains and sandwich shops, the targets of people who want a quick lunch or late-night drunk food. It's not like people go to a food truck to get a quality meal.

Re:Reminds me of Food Trucks

[K. S. Kyosuke]

They swoop in, scoop up money and split, leaving existing local businesses struggling in the aftermath.

Ugh. We must have read different stories on food trucks. You're either jealous or wearing pink glasses. Neither is good for objectivity.

Cost/Benefit

[Livius]

Regulation does have its value. Civilization is better off when food, buildings, etc. are safe, and freeloaders are not cheating. There are risks associated with the unregulated enterprises. Still, even simple things like barter and sales of second-hand merchandise are important contributions to quality of life.

But do the benefits outweigh the costs? That question doesn't get asked enough.

Of course, sometimes 'economy' is just a euphemism for 'bank accounts of the already ultra-rich', which is what some economists seem to think.

Re:Race to the Bottom

[SuricouRaven]

The Cynic school, which teaches that inefficiency, overhead and waste are vital economic elements in creating demand for labor.

Re:Sharing not good for a debt-based economy

[JoeyRox]

Money is supposed to represent a store of value earned by an economy's participants. Forcing those participants to spend or invest it under threat of confiscation by inflation is not only immoral but also ultimately counterproductive because it interferes with market forces and leads to malinvestment and unstable market prices.

Re:Reminds me of Food Trucks

[yurtinus]

Maybe you live in a weird place... maybe you just don't know how food trucks work. In my town (in wild west Nevada) food trucks fall under the same guidelines as restaurants. In fact, the majority of food preparation must be done in an inspected and licensed commercial kitchen - not in the truck itself. The trucks and kitchens are both inspected by the health department - and contrary to what seems to be popular slashdot belief, it is really quite easy to track down a food truck if it's known to be out of compliance. They're bit, and slow, and have logos and adverts printed on the side. They're registered as food service businesses just like a restaurant paying all the same taxes. On top of all that, they have additional regulations on where they can park. So sure, you can open a restaurant next door to an existing one, but you can't park your food truck in front of the bar next door to an existing restaurant (at least, not in my city).

I wouldn't go so far as to say they are a "far better method" than a regular restaurant, but they serve a niche and are far from the robber barons you guys are trying to portray them as.

Re:Reminds me of Food Trucks

[TheSeatOfMyPants]

Others of us have, and decided we will resist such temptations, large and small, and speak out against abuses. We call ourselves christians, Buddhists, secular humanists, jedi, whatever. Basically, people who have decided to not be dicks.

I prefer the term "ethical" as it covers the specific individuals that act that way, without including the unethical asshats that also happen to use the other terms for themselves.

Re: Sharing not good for a debt-based economy

[alen]

There is no such thing as a sharing economy. People renting out their assets and selling services as they have done for thousands of years

Only difference is that tech is allowing individuals to cheaply advertise their wares. Unlike in the last hundred years where you had to pay a lot of money to newspapers and other media.

Otherwise this so called sharing economy is just some marketing speak for stupid kids who eat this togetherness nonsense up. We had this small business and individual economy 100 years ago and corporations took over because they offer a consistent quality experience.