什么都不做就能挣钱：Uber和Airbnb的故事

    亚马逊也完全可以跟个风，显著提高自己的利润水平。它为什么要搞自己的仓库并且雇那么多工作人员呢？它完全也可以把自己改造成一个中介，通过介绍买卖来提成——完全不需要储存书籍或其他商品。

无责任，大利润

    那么，这种业务模式有什么不对的地方？其实没有任何问题，只要你不在乎它犹如“狂野西部”的商业生态系统。对于那些拥有大型实体业务的企业来说，最妙的一点是你能向他们征税并且监管他们，要求他们遵守劳动法，做所有其他你在“新经济时代”逐渐无法做的事情。

    比如，尽管Airbnb在网站上明文要求“房东们”必须要遵守残疾人法和反歧视法，但相较于一家连锁酒店，让他们执行这些法律的难度要大得多。很多已经通过旅馆税和占用税的城市和县都不会向Airbnb征收这些税，该公司最终只同意在极少数城市代收税款，而履行税法的义务则完全在个体“房东”一方。

    有些法律规定了人们的工作时间（特别是交通业）。这些法规旨在保护驾驶员及他人免于遭受交通事故。但愿政府能够督促个体承包商遵守这些法规。另外，不要指望这些公司缴纳失业保险和社保金，因为大多数为这些公司工作的人都是独立承包商，而不是雇员。

    提供实际产品和服务的企业还有一个好处，就是一旦出了问题，毕竟会有一个实体出来采取补救措施。比如，如果Webvan给消费者提供了变质产品或肉类，就得为此负责。诺德斯特龙（Norstrom）等零售商会给产品质量提供质保，但易趣不会。有一些租车公司在雇佣和管理驾驶员方面已经建立了良好的信用，一旦出了问题也愿意赔钱。而Uber就不会这样做——不过如果打起官司，会是什么结果还不好说。酒店一般都交了责任保险，也有必要的财务手段，一旦住客受到员工侮辱、伤害或其它安全问题，酒店会出面赔偿损失。Airbnb则不会这样，虽然该公司有大量经济资源，但是作为一家“非运营商”，不管你在短租期内出了什么问题，它早已把任何责任推卸得一干二净。

    这样推卸责任，包括推卸责任保险、遵守政府法规和缴纳工资税等责任，的确会节省大量的成本。这使得这些所谓“新经济”公司得以获得天生的、或许也是不公平的竞争优势。

    企业推卸对员工的责任，削减成本，早已是老生常谈。很多年前，就有雇主觉得雇佣员工是件头痛的事。既要缴纳工资税，又要花时间去招聘，如果你炒了人家的鱿鱼，还要小心人家以不当解聘或是歧视为由把你告上法庭。所以有不少企业裁掉了不少员工，把他们的工作交给临时性支持机构和承包商来完成，这也就是所谓“非正规雇佣”发展得如此之快的原因之一。现在市场上甚至出现了一些协会，代表的正是这个行业中许多公司的利益。

    美国国税局和各州就业服务部门担心，他们将无法掌握个体承包商的失业率和工资税情况。所以他们制定了一份清单，以确认为某些公司工作的“非雇员”究竟是不是雇员，然后进行审计以确保雇员获得合理待遇。

    Amazon could follow suit and raise its profit margins significantly. Why should it have warehouses or warehouse employees? It, too, could turn itself entirely into a transaction facilitator and simply take a cut for bringing buyers and sellers together—never needing to house a book or anything else it sells.

No responsibility, greater profits

    So, what’s wrong with this? Nothing, if you don’t mind a sort of Wild West business ecosystem. The nice thing about big companies with substantive physical businesses is that you can collect taxes from them, regulate them, enforce employment laws, and do all the other things that go out the window in the “new economy.”

    For example, while Airbnb posts requirements for its “hosts” to adhere to disability and anti-discrimination laws on its website, enforcement is obviously much tougher than it would be in dealing with a hotel chain. Many cities and counties that have passed hotel and occupancy taxes aren’t going to collect from Airbnb, which has finally agreed to collect taxes only in a handful of cities and leaves it to the individual “hosts” to comply with tax regulations.

    There are regulations that govern how long people, particularly in transportation, can work. These regulations seek to protect drivers and others from accidents. Good luck enforcing those rules on thousands of independent contractors. And say goodbye to unemployment insurance and employer contributions to Social Security—because most of the people working for these companies are independent contractors, not employees.

    The other nice thing about real businesses providing real products and services is that if there are problems, there is an entity that can offer remedies. The old Webvan would be responsible if it delivered rotten produce or bad meat from its warehouses, but not the new delivery services. Retailers like Nordstrom guarantee their products’ quality, not eBay. Limousine companies have established liability for hiring and supervising their drivers, and paying when things go wrong. Not Uber, although that remains to be seen as cases wind through court. Hotels carry liability insurance and have the financial wherewithal to protect guests who are assaulted by their workers or otherwise harmed by building safety problems. Not Airbnb, which certainly has plenty of financial resources but, as a “non-operator,” has shed any responsibility for what happens to you in your temporary rental.

    Offloading responsibility, including the responsibility for liability insurance, compliance with government regulations, and payroll taxes, saves costs, lots of costs. This gives new economy companies an inherent, and maybe even unfair, advantage over the competition.

    Company attempts to shed responsibility for their employees—and costs—is an old story. Many years ago, some employers decided that having actual employees was a pain. There were the payroll taxes, the expense and time of hiring, legal exposure to wrongful discharge and discrimination suits if you fired people; all in all, too much trouble. So, employers offloaded employees and their work to temporary help agencies and contracting organizations, which is one reason that “nonstandard employment” has grown so rapidly and there are even associations representing the interests of the many companies operating in this industry.

    The IRS and state employment services feared that they were going to lose out on unemployment and payroll taxes from independent contractors. So, they developed a checklist to ascertain whether “nonemployees” doing work for some company actually were or were not employees, and they conducted audits to ensure employees were treated as such.