Health Insurance | Working Stiffed

Obamacare Has Sentenced Me to Death

Yes, it’s true. Obamacare has sentenced me to death…and financial destitution. I feel it’s important to address this issue on this, the last day we are told to register for Obamacare without incurring an unconstitutional tax penalty.

I have been without health insurance, which I cannot afford, for a year-and-a-half and I live in a state that does not extend Medicaid to people in my position. As a result, I am one serious disease or accident away from certain death.

After dutifully paying taxes for close to 40 years, helping to send other people’s kids to school (I don’t have kids) and funding food stamps and benefits for thousands of people, my government is repaying me by turning its back on me during my hour of need…and penalizing me for my new-found destitution, to boot.

How did this happen? I am a 52-year-old woman who was last employed in a full-time position with benefits four years ago; I was part of a group purge after my company was acquired by a competitor. This scenario is familiar to most of you, I’m sure. I thought I’d find another job with benefits easily, but I was wrong.

As The New York Times recently reported, women over 50 account for half of all long-term unemployed people. After remaining steadily employed in good, white collar lower management positions for more than 30 years, I was suddenly an unwilling participant in the trendy new gig economy out of necessity.

For this I owe a big thanks to Bill Clinton and NAFTA, which destroyed the American middle class by allowing companies to ship jobs overseas and import H1-B visa “guest workers.” Now, many of us find that we’re unemployable more than 20 years before we can collect a pension (if we even have one) or Social Security (if it will still exist by then).

My new reality involves going months without work, or “contracts,” and even when I do get a temporary contract position, my “clients” periodically cut my hours without warning. As a result, I made less than $10k last year.

Needless to say, I can’t afford the so-called affordable insurance Obama promised. According to the Affordable Care Act (ACA) health care exchange marketplace, I’d need to pay $550 a month for a policy with an $8,000 deductible. And what good is a subsidy when you go months without any income?

A low-cost, pre-Obamacare catastrophic insurance policy would be helpful right about now. Unfortunately, Obamacare-less forces me to buy an overpriced policy with a high deductible, so that I can share the privilege of paying for some dude’s Viagra prescription and pediatric dental insurance (like I said, I don’t have kids).

To make things worse, I’m about to get hit with the Obamacare penalty…and this is on top having to drain my savings and take hardship withdrawals from my 401(k) (which I am also about to be unfairly penalized for) just to survive in our “new normal” transient, gig economy that mainstream media finds so hip and trendy.

I’ve decided that if something happens to me health-wise, I’m just going to die, because if I am hospitalized, I stand to lose my home and what little I have left, so why bother sticking around?

If you like Obamacare, it’s probably because you don’t need it

I am so tired of brainwashed Obamacare defenders crowing about the 12 million Americans who couldn’t get insurance before now having coverage. Frankly, in a country of 330 million people where close to 100 million are out of the workforce (many not by choice), that’s a drop in the uninsured bucket, so bragging is totally uncalled for. Maybe they’re promoting this “success” because they know that math-challenged Common Core students are easily impressed by any number you throw at them.

Obamacare supporters are also quick to blame states that don’t extend Medicaid. Why? Should citizens of states that aren’t on board with Obamacare be penalized? There wasn’t a Medicaid referendum in any state that I am aware of.

And, if Obamacare is supposed to mandate affordable insurance for all, why didn’t it nationalize Medicaid? At the very least, it should exempt those of us who live in Medicaid-deprived states from Obamacare.

And then there’s the pre-existing condition clause. Sorry, Obamacare defenders, but I’m not down with being stuck with the rest of this ugly baby just for that one benefit. Besides, a single-payer health care solution would take care of pre-existing conditions just as effectively. As it stands, the insurance companies are offsetting their pre-existing condition “losses” with double-digit rate increases each year.

Not surprisingly, I find that the strongest supporters of this crony capitalist screw job are people who have employer-paid health insurance or at least make or have enough money to overpay for their insurance.

I know a couple of people who used to sing the praises of Obamacare….until they lost their jobs, were forced to join the gig economy, and had to actually rely on Obamacare for coverage. Needless to say, both have now joined the repeal Obamacare bandwagon.

It’s unconstitutional

The lie Obama sold us (among many) when he was promoting this travesty was access and affordability…and, of course, we couldn’t keep our doctors, after all (not that we can afford them now anyway, so I suppose this is a moot point for those of us who inhabit the Obamacare penal colony). I admit that I bought the spin. I even voted for the lying clown. What we got instead was a gun to our heads forcing us to purchase an overpriced product from PRIVATE companies or face hefty, escalating tax penalties.

No income limits were set; whether you make $10k (or less) or $100k a year, if you don’t buy insurance, you get taxed. Seriously? How is that legal? Or fair? First of all, people who make less than $30k shouldn’t pay ANY taxes, never mind have tax penalties imposed upon them.

And if Obama was so hell-bent on insuring us, why didn’t he mandate maximum premium amounts that insurers could charge? Say, $200 a month? Let’s call Obamacare what it is: a blank corporate welfare check to the insurance companies.

Not a peep from presidential candidates

NOT ONE presidential candidate has addressed this travesty. Several running for president are sitting members of Congress. They’ve taken a two year paid vacation on our tax payer dime to attend fundraisers and campaign for an office most don’t stand a chance of winning. Must be nice.

NOT ONE of them (including our socialist man of the people, Bernie Sanders) can be bothered to spare a moment to introduce legislation NOW to at least waive the “Cadillac tax” penalty. No, instead of nuking the toxic provisions of Obamacare, Congressional members voted to repeal the whole thing, knowing that the president would veto the resolution….pure theater…or political masturbation.

As a member of Congress you have a unique opportunity to demonstrate your leadership abilities through legislation, and there’s no time like the present. That’s probably the ONLY advantage you have over Donald Trump. Talk is cheap. So, why not lead by example? Because, frankly, too many of us don’t have a year to wait for action…nor do we trust empty campaign promises.

Speaking of leading by example, I invite Obamacare defenders to show me how great it is by contributing funds to pay my Obamacare tax penalty and/or my monthly insurance premiums. On second thought, the way our economy is going, maybe you should hang on to your money…you’ll probably need it to pay for your own “affordable” Obamacare insurance someday.

If you went back in time 20 or more years ago and told the people back then that in the near future employers would force them to take a blood test or they would lose their health insurance coverage, I’m sure they’d laugh and assume you were citing some obscure subplot from Orwell’s 1984.

You see, not too long ago, if such a widespread policy was proposed, people would have been outraged and protests would have broken out nationwide to put an end to such a blatant invasion of privacy.

Not so in 21^st century America. It looks like all the GMOs we eat, the fluoride in our water and the toxic mercury- and formaldehyde-laced vaccines we take willingly (or not so willingly, if you live in California) has left us brain damaged and semi-comatose.

We know our smartphones and TVs have taken a chunk out of our IQs, which may explain why 10 percent of college grads now believe that Judge Judy is a Supreme Court justice and some Americans think that Martin Luther King was the first black man on the moon. How else can we explain this epidemic of apathy and ignorance when it comes to our rights and freedoms?

We should have known we were in trouble when poor Edward Snowden hung his life out on the line to warn us about the criminal intrusiveness of our government only to have many Americans just shrug and say, “So what? I’ve got nothing to hide.” Hell, these pod people even parroted the government propaganda that he was a traitor.

I’m sure Snowden was even more shocked by our zombie-like reaction to our government’s widespread violation of the Fourth Amendment than he was when he discovered the extent of U.S. government surveillance. He obviously overestimated our present capacity for outrage and action.

So it should come as no surprise that corporate America wants to get in on the invasive fun. And why not? With health insurance premiums skyrocketing, it was only a matter of time before they would exploit our complacent idiocy by persuading employees to willingly submit to biometric screenings that measure blood pressure, weight, waist size, body mass index (BMI), cholesterol levels and other health vitals, or risk paying health coverage surcharges (as smokers already do) or losing coverage altogether.

So what if these wellness programs violate Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) laws or the protected health information (PHI) provisions of the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA)? You’ve got nothing to hide, right? And, gee, what’s wrong with getting healthy and getting a discount on your employer health insurance coverage?

The Gift of Obamacare: Making Private Health Information Public

As if the Patient Protection and “Affordable” Care Act (ACA) wasn’t bad (and unconstitutional) enough by forcing you to buy health insurance from a private company under threat of tax penalties (?), we can also blame Obamacare for the explosion of invasive employee wellness screenings.

Surprised? Don’t be. After all, the ACA was written by the insurance companies and Jonathan Gruber, an arrogant, elitist jerk from MIT who laughed and admitted that the stupidity of American voters made this mess possible.

One would have thought that the Gruber fiasco would have been enough to inspire public outrage and force a repeal of Obamacare…but, again, you’d be overestimating the pod people who have body-snatched millions of once spirited, freedom-loving Americans.

The ACA helped advance the notion that healthy lifestyles would control health care costs; what seemed like harmless, even positive, rhetoric at the time has now been exposed as just another privacy-invading, money-making venture. It’s always about taking your money and invading your privacy with these clowns.

Anyone who has had a screening or physical in recent years knows that these examinations are designed to do one thing and one thing only…to make you a lifelong dependent on some hideously overpriced pharmaceutical drug that has 29 potentially lethal side effects (and the more drugs they can prescribe, safely or not, the better).

In 2014, 95 percent of employers had a health risk assessment, biometric screening or some type of wellness screening program in place, and 74 percent of the programs dangled an incentive carrot to get employees to participate (comply) usually a modest discount in health plan premiums.

Such high adoption rates by employers mean that these programs will now likely determine the course of your career. Good luck climbing the corporate ladder after your boss learns that you’re on an anti-psychotic and three blood pressure medications.

It’s Voluntary…Until it’s Not

Even if your company’s wellness plan is voluntary now, don’t be fooled. That’s how it always starts. Like a lot companies, Flambeau, a Wisconsin-based plastic maker, introduced their “voluntary” wellness program as a way to lower their health care costs and cut down on employee sick days.

But since wellness programs need high participation rates in order to get the best bang for the corporate buck, when participation rates are low, some companies are motivated to take off the kid gloves and make it a requirement for keeping insurance coverage. That’s what Flambeu did, and one employee who refused to participate in Flambeau’s program filed a complaint with the EEOC.

The Flambeu lawsuit is one of several such cases working their way through the legal system these days. The EEOC’s main argument in the Flambeu suit, and others like it, is that forcing employees to participate in wellness programs, especially when they involve biometic screening or health assessments, violates the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). The ADA prohibits companies from obtaining personal health information from employees or requiring that they submit to a medical exam. End of story, right?

Not so fast. For some reason, the U.S. District Court in Wisconsin didn’t see it that way. They ruled that data collected through wellness programs doesn’t violate the ADA. The EEOC is reviewing the decision, whatever that means.

Biometric Gene-ings and GINA

While the EEOC is leveraging ADA protections in its wellness program lawsuits, it’s also citing the Genetic Information Nondiscrimination Act (GINA), as it did in its suit on behalf of employees of Honeywell. Under GINA, employers are prohibited from requesting genetic information from employees, especially when that information is tied to health insurance coverage.

Honeywell employees turned to the EEOC after they balked at participating in the company’s wellness program and were slapped with a fat insurance premium surcharge. Employee spouses weren’t spared either; they were hit with a $1,000 tobacco surcharge for not coughing up their DNA, whether they smoked or not (guilty until proving innocent?).

Smokers know a thing or two about health insurance tyranny. Our poor, nicotine-addicted social pariah friends are always convenient canaries in the coal mine when it comes to test driving civil rights violations.

The EEOC cited both the ADA and GINA in the Honeywell case. And while the Minnesota District Court denied the EEOC’s request to issue a temporary restraining order against Honeywell’s wellness program, in its decision, the court expressed some concern as to how the ACA wellness directive would jibe with the ADA, GINA and other privacy laws. Ya think?

The courts are all over the place in these decisions (lower courts have handed out victories to both sides) and it’s hard to say when, or if, definitive judicial determination will ever emerge.

Employee Wellness Programs Can Hurt Your Credit Rating?

Another consideration: you may have noticed that your company hired an outside company to administer their wellness program. In addition to worrying that your boss will learn that you have high blood pressure, should you also be concerned that your info will be sold to a credit monitoring company or third-party marketer…and that your screening could affect your ability to get a car loan or mortgage in the future?

As it turns out, yes, you should be concerned, because wellness program vendors are not bound by HIPAA privacy protections.

If you read the fine print in their terms & conditions, you’ll find that many of these contractors have policies that allow them to share “identifiable data” with unidentified third parties “working to improve employee health.” Also, “de-identified” group health results are regularly shared with employers and researchers, and it’s been proven that this data can easily by “re-identified” and used for credit screening, marketing…or even… job displacement?

Think that Fitbit or other wearable fitness device makes you look cool? It turns out it also makes data mining your vitals that much easier. Nice, huh?

Health Care Employees VOLUNTEER their Protected Health Information

As an uninsured, underemployed freelancer, wellness programs didn’t ping my radar until recently when my client, a prestigious regional health care system, needed me to craft some employee communications regarding their wellness program.

The last time I was a full-time, salaried employee, employee wellness programs were strictly voluntary, so I didn’t give it a second thought. I quickly learned how much the ACA changed things.

Having worked in health care in some capacity for nearly two decades, I couldn’t believe that hospital personnel would agree to this madness. After all, these people would be terminated immediately if they violated a patient’s private health information, so why would they surrender their own private information? Shockingly, I learned many did just that.

I’m sure many workers realize this is a violation of their privacy, but they’re scared that if they don’t participate, they’ll end up on some undesirable human resources list (unfortunately, they’re probably right).

Others, who see themselves as being fit and healthy, may comply because they feel that they…wait for it… have nothing to hide. Good for them, but what if someone has a condition that they have a right to hide from the world?

What if you’re bipolar or diabetic, for example? Or, what if you have either condition, but don’t know it yet? Would you feel comfortable having your boss find out at the same time that you do? And how confident are you that you’d survive the next mass layoff if your biometric screening places you outside “normal” health levels in one or more categories? After all, there’s no way to prove that your condition would have had anything to do with your termination.

Don’t think for one minute that today’s corporate tightwads won’t weigh your health status when deciding if they want, or need, to part company with you, especially if they know that your fat medical bills will go with you.

Unfortunately, these days, the government and large employers don’t have to try too hard to push us toward controlled serfdom; they’ve handed us the shovel and we’re digging our way there ourselves, thank you. The powers that be have no need to fear torch and pitchfork mobs in the U.S. anymore.

No, the freeze-dried American zombie masses are content to drink beer, obsess over football and reality TV (our modern day bread and circuses) and to silently go along to get along. I guess as long as we have “nothing to hide” and Judge Judy is sitting on the Supreme Court, we have nothing to worry about.

This Thanksgiving, Obama and the mainstream media outlets that promote his agenda, were working overtime to convince Americans that we should accept thousands, and eventually hundreds of thousands of Syrian refugees, because it is “who we are” as a nation.

I have to ask: who are we as a nation? And does it even matter, now that Obama and Congress are working to dissolve the U.S. into a North American Union through the Trans-Pacific “Partnership” (TPP)?

Forgive me; I know this post is a little long, but I feel compelled to make a few points in support of the working stiffed in this country. And it seems that whenever I express the opinions that follow on Huffington Post or Facebook, they get scrubbed, even though I don’t use profane language or indulge in troll-like behavior. Censorship. Is that “who we are” as a nation? It would seem so.

There’s no question that the refugee crisis is a terrible human tragedy. And there’s also no question that the crisis was created by the criminal neocons in our government who insist on invading and overthrowing governments in the Middle East and Africa on behalf of their transnational bankster benefactors and Saudi Arabia.

But bring these people here? I don’t think so. I think it makes more sense to have the wealthy Middle Eastern countries like Saudi Arabia (the true architects of chaos in the region) resettle these poor people, as Ben Carson says. I don’t care for Carson, but his recommendation in this case makes the most sense.

Even if we can all agree that the majority of those seeking asylum are not ISIS terrorists, allowing hundreds of thousands of them to come here would be an act of economic terrorism against the millions of U.S. laborers and citizens who are struggling to survive in 21st century America.

Let me explain:

There are more than 94 million U.S. citizens out of the workforce; most don’t work because they can’t get jobs (people over 50 have it particularly rough)

A shocking number of our veterans (a number of whom were forced to do close to a dozen tours of duty), are homeless and/or have no access to health care

Our college students are saddled with an astounding amount of college loan debt that they can’t get rid of through bankruptcy—and to make matters worse, they have little hope of finding work to pay off their loans if or when they graduate

We are told that we “don’t have the money” to give Social Security recipients a cost of living increase next year (while commodity and food prices continue to soar)

We are facing the inevitability of more of our jobs being shipped overseas once our corrupt Congress passes the treasonous, sovereignty-destroying TPP

Obamacare penalizes poor people who can’t afford the program’s “affordable” health insurance by levying an unconstitutional tax/fine (taxation by citation)

No money is allocated to fix our crumbling infrastructure or to insulate our unprotected power grid (which means we will be knocked back into the Stone Age when, not if, we are hit by an EMP or solar flare)

I can go on. All things considered, should the refugees be our top priority? I don’t think so. Where is the public outrage over the issues I just outlined?

John Oliver recently went on a clever rant on his show about our “irrational fear” of allowing Syrian migrants into our country; he pointed out that they are thoroughly vetted. All I could think of while listening to him go on about the six or seven layers of scrutiny these people face is, why are we spending our money on this? When I think of the needs I list above, it’s downright criminal.

Not too long ago, Alex Nowrasteh, an immigration policy analyst at the (globalist-sponsored) Cato Institute’s Center for Global Liberty and Prosperity, published a piece in the Washington Post that argued for allowing the migration; he said it would even help our country.

He sought to ease the concerns of U.S. taxpayers who don’t support bankrolling the welfare and government programs these migrants will undoubtedly require if they are allowed to come. Nowrasteh proposes that Americans and charities (like the Cato Institute?) sponsor them, and in return, the U.S. government should lift all quotas and restrictions on work permits “without complicating regulations.” Really? Can you guess whose jobs they’ll need to take once their sponsors get them situated?

Even our most socialist-leaning president to date, Franklyn Roosevelt, closed our country’s borders during the Depression. He was focused on restoring the economic health of the country and helping to create jobs for U.S. citizens. It would be nice if Obama dedicated his rhetoric and actions in support of the Americans he was elected to represent, like Roosevelt did. Instead, he lobbies for job-destroying initiatives like the TPP and cheap labor through migration.

We are also repeatedly told the lie that migrants only take manual labor jobs that Americans don’t want. When I was growing up, I could easily get one of “those jobs that Americans don’t want.” They helped me save money for college and taught me how to be a responsible young adult; the crappy work and low pay of these jobs also served as an incentive for me to pursue higher education, so I could get “better” jobs.

These days, kids can’t get so-called “crappy jobs” easily, so they continue to depend on their already financially stressed parents for spending money, or they turn to crime. And now that our government has privatized prisons, kids who get caught committing crimes often find that their lives are essentially over before they’ve even begun.

The lie about the “jobs that Americans don’t want” has a counterpart in “the jobs that Americans can’t do.” Silicon Valley ushered in the era of the H-1B visa under the pretense that there aren’t enough trained U.S. workers to handle the volume of tech jobs they create. This has become an egregious tool of domestic economic cannibalism.

Fortune 500 companies like Disney and AT&T took that loophole and drove a truck through it, by importing low wage foreign workers by the thousands to replace qualified U.S. workers. As I write this, 1,200 displaced U.S. Disney workers are in New York training their foreign replacements.

A bipartisan Senate bill banning the replacement of U.S. workers with H-1B visa holders was just introduced. Hopefully, it will pass.

Lastly, there is the “we are all children of immigrants” argument. While that’s true, let’s take a closer look at that. When my grandparents legally migrated to this country after World War II, it was long before the banksters took over our republic and made it a plutocracy; the U.S. was truly a land of growth and opportunity. They wanted to come here sooner, but Roosevelt had closed the doors during the Depression, as I mentioned earlier; too many Americans were out of work….like now.

My grandparents came here to assimilate: they learned English, they pledged allegiance to the American flag and they built their businesses without imposing on American taxpayers. Now, in these times of PC psychosis, we must accommodate every culture to the point that we have become the national equivalent of the tower of babble.

As for those who support leaving our borders wide open by using the example of the Pilgrims coming to America, has anyone asked the Native Americans how that migration worked out for them? I didn’t think so.

Opposition to Syrian refugee migration is not about racism or hatred; it’s about economic feasibility. And, yes, there is some fear involved. After all, we just witnessed a handful of ISIS terrorists kill or injure close to 500 Parisians in less than an hour. It doesn’t take an army of people to take a country hostage.

Our focus needs to be on fixing our country and restoring our middle class. We can no longer afford to turn our backs on struggling U.S. citizens or to overlook the fact that we no longer manufacture anything. We also can’t continue to allow transnational companies incorporated here to ship U.S. jobs overseas at will or to import “migrants” who will work for much less.

Trying to distract us from our very real problems by promoting cost-prohibitive, altruistic global outreach doesn’t help anyone. We are not the prosperous country we were 50 years ago; we are a nation in rapid decline. That, Mr. Obama, is unfortunately “who we are” now as a nation. Charity begins at home, Chief, so do us all a favor and re-prioritize and get busy before it’s too late.

Uber is a German word that means above the rest. It is also the apt name of a popular mobile app transportation network company. For those of us trying to survive in the growing on-demand economy promoted by Uber, images of goose-stepping armies of gig economy fascists readily spring to mind. And my futurist crystal ball tells me that it’s in our best interest to stay out from under their technocratic jackboots.

Uber has attracted a lot of attention recently, both positive and negative, for proudly trying to redefine full-time employees as contractors.

Their business model isn’t new; Corporate America has been embracing transient labor in order to avoid paying employee benefits and related corporate taxes for some years now.

Unlike Uber, they don’t brag about it, though. After all, displacing full-time employees for contractors, many of them overseas or foreign nationals here on visas, still doesn’t play well in Peoria; just ask Disney.

No, Uber is proudly spinning its business model as one that entrepreneurial thought leaders are embracing in order to survive and thrive in our brave new world. What’s not to love? Their drivers are business partners, not employees.

Many millennials cheer Uber’s entrepreneurial passion, especially those who earn their bitcoins by sucking on a tech company’s teat. They feel we need to be free agents in order to innovate, or we deserve to disintegrate. How else can you become a mini-Zuckerberg and invent an app that Google, or even Zuckerberg himself, will buy from you for billions?

I admire their spunk, but as someone who’s navigated through a few boom and bust economies, this business model looks a lot like a sweat shop in silicon clothing.

We can’t be too surprised by the rise of the on-demand economy and companies like Uber (or Uberettes, as I like to call Uber-like startups). After all, we have become increasingly impatient consumers; millennials and boomers alike want instant results and gratification: we want a cab NOW; we want our Web-purchased goods NOW; we want everything NOW.

The more affluent among us don’t even mind Uber’s other ingenious invention, “surge pricing.” It’s not enough that Uber doesn’t want to pay for its drivers’ FICA, Medicare, workers’ comp and health insurance; no, they also favor a pricing plan designed to bleed as much money out of their customers as possible, even during terrorist attacks.

Surge pricing sticker shock isn’t for the faint of heart or wallet. Last Halloween, a Denver man was changed $539 for an 18-mile ride that typically costs around $40. Uber even spiked rates in Sydney, Australia when a local café was under siege last Christmas. Ho-ho-no! Stories like these pop up in the news every day.

Uber’s CEO, Travis Kalanick, defends his business model by saying that if he’s forced to provide employee benefits or charge reasonable cab fares, his company won’t survive.

What if all CEOs felt as Kalanick and collectively decided to make all U.S. workers 1099 contractors? A cab driver is one thing, but would you feel safe leaving your child at a day care center staffed by contractors who could come and go as they please without a background check?

And what role, if any, has our over-reliance on a transient labor force played in the recent rash of cyber security breaches? Is it unreasonable to think that an underpaid, often offshore, contractor would sell your personal info to supplement his or her income?

Wouldn’t an employee who has a vested financial interest in keeping their job be more reliable in handling your customer’s sensitive information? I guess it’s easier to publicly blame North Korea or China for all such breaches; gotta keep those admin costs down and the shareholders happy, you know?

And then there are the other lifestyle perks that come with being part of the non-gig economy: credit. How many Uber drivers can qualify for a mortgage, a car loan, or even a credit card?

Banks aren’t adjusting their requirements to accommodate the on-demand economy. They still want evidence of secure employment and if you don’t have a steady (hopefully, fat) paycheck deposited biweekly into your account, you won’t find a lot of love or credit at Wells Fargo or Citibank, even if you’ve been driving for Uber for years.

If we allow Uber and its ilk to shift the labor force Overton Window and acclimate us to being part of an on-demand workforce, we’re building a seamless bridge to an even more dire reality: robots and AI (artificial intelligence).

Uber’s Kalanick admitted last year that he can’t wait to dump his “business partner” drivers as soon as driverless cars are more reliable.

He’s not alone. Notice how companies worldwide are gradually introducing robots into the workforce? Lowe’s publicly tested a multilingual sales assistant robot last year and a five-star hotel staffed entirely by robots just opened in Japan. All hail the coming technocracy!

The popular narrative is that AI is cool and robots are needed for jobs companies can’t fill with people (ironically enough, the latter narrative is similar to the one U.S.-based companies use to explain why they need to hire foreign nationals). That’s where this is heading folks: 1099 workers today, replaced by robots tomorrow.

The only hope we have of saving our earning power is through the power of the purse. Support companies that support their employees and don’t patronize any humanity-hating businesses that replace full-time employees with cheap labor or R2D2. In doing so, you may just save your future employment prospects.

Tag: health insurance

Employee Wellness Program Privacy: Biometric Screening Tyranny

Uber’s On-Demand Economy and the Decline of the U.S. Worker