Originally Posted by Giantaxe

Of course, it's mainly about Uber's bottom line.

I'm voting "no" on this one as I believe drivers should be treated as employees with commensurate benefits. I'm also fed up of incessant political mailings from Uber that I never asked for beyond having used Uber in the past. To me, being a consumer of a company doesn't give them carte blanche to do this.

Originally Posted by Jsmth321

California is proposition heaven.

Propositions include:
14- Bond, Issues $5.5 billion in bonds for state stem cell research institute
15- Taxes, Requires commercial and industrial properties to be taxed based on market value and dedicates revenue
16- Repeals Proposition 209 (1996), which says that the state cannot discriminate or grant preferential treatment based on race, sex, color, ethnicity, or national origin in public employment, education, or contracting
17- Restores the right to vote to people convicted of felonies who are on parole
18- Allows 17-year-olds who will be 18 at the time of the next general election to vote in primaries and special elections
19- Changes tax assessment transfers and inheritance rules
20- Makes changes to policies related to criminal sentencing charges, prison release, and DNA collection
21- Expands local governments' power to use rent control
22- Considers app-based drivers to be independent contractors and enacts several labor policies related to app-based companies
23- Requires physician on-site at dialysis clinics and consent from the state for a clinic to close
24- Expands the provisions of the California Consumer Privacy Act (CCPA) and creates the California Privacy Protection Agency to implement and enforce the CCPA
25- Replaces cash bail with risk assessments for suspects awaiting trial

Prop 22 support has spent the most money this year for any prop, $184,344,108.14 so far.

Prop 18 comes in with the least amount spent, support $342,424.10, opposition $0

https://ballotpedia.org/California_2...t_propositions

2016 my county had a lot of judges, but this time around only 1.

Originally Posted by username.exe

I'm going to vote 'No' on exempting app-based transportation companies (weird and confusing wording on this prop).
At the end of the day, Uber will just pass the cost on to the consumer, and I'm okay with that. The drivers are the ones who have gotten continually squeezed, year in, year out.

Originally Posted by vespucci

I don't vote on most of the propositions. Too much to study. I don't know how people manage to vote on all of them.

I suspect many people decide based on ads and how it's presented rather than the merits of the proposition. There was a proposition a couple of years ago which was similar in parts to the present Prop 19, but it was rejected I expect because it was said to be promoted by realtors who would profit from the increase in senior home sales. With the present Prop 19 there doesn't seem to be any talk of realtors, instead the benefit to Fire Protection and schools from the increased revenue from more sales, so I expect it will pass.

Originally Posted by Steerpike

Ignoring Uber/Lyft etc's doom-and-gloom statements, what do you guys think will actually happen if the prop fails (that is, if they are forced to treat drivers as employees)? Do you think they'll still be able to allow drivers to work a very flexible schedule, and a very 'light' schedule?

Originally Posted by username.exe

Yes, because at the end of the day, that's the backbone of their business model. I think the market will eventually determine whether it's viable business. It should just be done without squeezing the drivers.
It really bothers me that VCs are ploughing bajillions into Uber and Lyft, and forcing drivers into almost-poverty wages, sidestepping all of the responsibilities of a traditional business operation. (It's like how Air BnB can 'create' a hotel resort on a residential street that was never zoned for that purpose, and just claim that they are simply a 'technology company.

That said, I think the legislation put together by Lorena Gonzalez in the State Senate (it's not just about transportation, but covers freelancers of various descriptions) is not-very-well-done to say the least.

Originally Posted by Jsmth321

More and more city's are also cracking down on AirBnB placing restrictions, which probably wont help their business plan.

Originally Posted by Jerseygirl

Our buildings do not allow AirBbB. There have been several shootings linked to them in the city, the latest was last night. The bullet actually went through the wall into another unit. Goodness knows how that happened, AFAIK all modern condos have concrete walls between the units.

Originally Posted by Boiler

I had 2 new AirBnB's open up by me just as the Covid hot big time, the County banned them but as they did not do anything practical people just carried on.