Remember AB5? That’s the new law out in California that is supposed to protect gig economy workers (Uber, Lyft, etc.) which Vox championed, writing back in October that the “alternative to AB 5 would be worse”:
California’s #AB5 law has sparked a new controversy. https://t.co/TDCE6ywIDX
— Vox (@voxdotcom) October 21, 2019
You see, the “new controversy” Vox wrote about in the above tweet was that media freelancers would be treated the same way as say Uber drivers, which everyone predicted would result in layoffs. And those layoffs have begun, even at Vox Media:
Law of unintended consequences: “Vox Media to cut hundreds of freelance jobs ahead of California's AB5” https://t.co/llI46c4po5
— Josh Kraushaar (@HotlineJosh) December 17, 2019
“Peak Vox” has been reached:
Peak Vox pic.twitter.com/vmpuhDmBKt
— Matt Mackowiak (@MattMackowiak) December 17, 2019
An instant classic:
That's the Mount Everest of Vox.
— I'm Perplexed (@Im_Perplexed) December 17, 2019
It’s hard to call these “unintended consequences” when this is exactly what California Dems wanted to happen:
"Unfortunately, this is exactly what we predicted would happen, and exactly what we told lawmakers would happen." co-leader of California Freelance Writers United Alisha Grauso said in a statement https://t.co/5ZNBqXd2WM
— The Hollywood Reporter (@THR) December 16, 2019
100% true:
Vox backed this bill ?
— Elizabeth Nolan Brown (@ENBrown) December 17, 2019
We banned freelancing and now freelancers are out of work? UNINTENDED CONSEQUENCES
We banned sex ads and now sex workers have to go back to the streets? UNINTENDED CONSEQUENCES
Almost as if being a Democrat or Republican means never having to take responsibility for anything
— Elizabeth Nolan Brown (@ENBrown) December 17, 2019
Recommended
Don’t push job-killing laws as a lefty signaling mechanism next time, maybe?
— Elizabeth Nolan Brown (@ENBrown) December 17, 2019
But they won’t change:
This should be a “see the light” moment for these Leftists to stop voting for Leftists
— Jeremy Frankel (@FrankelJeremy) December 17, 2019
Lather. Rinse. Repeat:
union-backed initiative kills jobs for normal people, news at 11 https://t.co/9NhA8H6cll
— Sonny Bunch (@SonnyBunch) December 17, 2019
Great job, California:
It’s going to suck when services like Uber, Lyft, DoorDash etc. inevitably aren’t available in many CA markets while those who relied on contract work no longer have jobs.
I’m sure it will make those CA residents feel better when CA Dems say they were just trying to help.
— (((AG))) (@AG_Conservative) December 17, 2019
The chief sponsor of the bill, Lorena Gonzalez, is firing back at critics on Twitter:
Here is the chief sponsor of the bill telling those complaining about their lost jobs that they just don't understand what's best for them (She is, unsurprisingly, a Warren fan in case you were wondering how you get these brilliant proposals federally): https://t.co/JP0ehcv5pS
— (((AG))) (@AG_Conservative) December 17, 2019
And it’s not going well:
They're creating like 15 full time jobs for HUNDREDS of us who were let go just because California. That's good? How???
— Rebecca Lawson (@beccaaftersix) December 16, 2019
And don't tell me what's good for me. This is lost income for my family. In the case of some of my friends, THOUSANDS of dollars a month. It's horrible.
— Rebecca Lawson (@beccaaftersix) December 16, 2019
You really just keep doubling down every single day, don't you? What will it take for you to understand how the particularities of freelance writing shouldn't fall under the same umbrella as, say, Uber & Lyft drivers?
— collazoprojects (@collazoprojects) December 16, 2019
Let’s see if it comes up in the California debate (if that debate still happens):
Ah yes. Bernie, Warren, and Kamala Harris all expressed support for this measure months ago: https://t.co/JAFHIZCVQC
They will inevitably push similar measures forcing government control over business at the federal level, and then act shocked about the predictable consequences.
— (((AG))) (@AG_Conservative) December 17, 2019
***