That's true of entrepreneurs in general. I think most of the people doing that would rather have "poor job security" than "no job security" (or the alternative of simply no job) - which is the case for almost all workers without specific special skills.
> Is this a fundamentally better model for the middle class than being an Avon salesperson?
Comparing it to MLM who's business model is dependent on replicating itself is a completely different use case than what this is.
There is a bigger point that the article tries to call our attention to. If the choice is between "poor" job security and "no" job security, that is a pretty terrible choice. It does not blame Lyft et al directly. It asks us to consider the broader implications for our economy, and if anything, whether the "sharing economy" is truly its savior. That is the analogy with Avon et al for the previous generation (not the precise business model).
That's true of entrepreneurs in general. I think most of the people doing that would rather have "poor job security" than "no job security" (or the alternative of simply no job) - which is the case for almost all workers without specific special skills.
> Is this a fundamentally better model for the middle class than being an Avon salesperson?
Comparing it to MLM who's business model is dependent on replicating itself is a completely different use case than what this is.