[r29vzg2]

That’s a very cynical view. What about You and I who also have a down payment and a mortgage? You can argue that Uber was exploiting workers, but at the same time, none of them were forced to work. All made a free choice. And now “The State” has essentially legislated them out of their jobs. The State has literally said, “you’re too stupid to realize you’re being taken advantage of, so you can’t work this job”. I’d say that “The State” is far more of a problem here than Uber.

[chillacy]

I definitely agree with you on this issue, but want to point out that "free choice" can lead to suboptimal outcomes. Here's an excerpt by Singer:

> Suppose I live in the suburbs and work in the city. I could drive my car to work, or take the bus. I prefer not to wait around for the bus, and so I take my car. Fifty thousand other people living in my suburb face the same choice and make the same decision. The road to town is choked with cars. It takes each of us an hour to travel ten miles. In this situation, according to the liberal conception of freedom, we have all chosen freely. Yet the outcome is something none of us want. If we all went by bus, the roads would be empty and we could cover the distance in twenty minutes. Even with the inconvenience of waiting at the bus stop, we would all prefer that. We are, of course, free to alter our choice of transportation, but what can we do? While so many cars slow the bus down, why should any individual choose differently? The liberal conception of freedom has led to a paradox: we have each chosen in our own interests, but the result is in no one’s interest. Individual rationality, collective irrationality…

Taken from https://slatestarcodex.com/2014/09/13/book-review-singer-on-...