Looks like the primary concern is with large companies such as uber and other ride
share and food delivery services. In this regard, it is understandable but still a bit
For example, I have a friend that is a nuclear engineer. He contracts jobs and travels
every so many years. In other word he may work at a nuclear plant a year or several
years. He is getting paid a salary. A very high salary. He does pay for his insurance,
etc. For him, paying for things like insurance, is a drop in the bucket since he receives
very high salary. So what I am saying is, he is a real example of a real contractor.
GPT was never meant as a contractor program. As a contractor, you are in fact liable
for the contract you agree to. In GPT we are not in contract. We're not forced to do
anything. That goes for surveys and tasks.
GPT is an agreement, not a contract. Yes, there is a difference. We agree to do a
survey and/or task/offer, for the stated amount or we simply close it out and not
In a contract, you can be taken to court and sued. You are liable for what you
contracted to do.
So I suspect some of the above I stated, is where the grounds land.
The issue these days as you Darkstar2 have made very clear, you are relying on GPT
as a 100% source of income. GPT was never intended as a 100% source of income.
It was meant as extra money in one's spare time.
The same thing has happen with McDonalds and other fast food joints. With those
the complaints by workers is higher wages. But these fast food joints was never
intended for life wages. Just like car hops working for tips in the old days.
Well, I gotta run out for a bit. Interesting topic.