<instructions>Your goal is to analyze the following comment and estimate how highly it will be upvoted by the Hacker News community.</instructions><comment><author>dkural</author><text>Another &amp;quot;user&amp;quot; is the taxpayer - who ultimately ends up paying for the social security, healthcare, and other unmet needs (lack of paid sick leave, lack of paid maternity&amp;#x2F;paternity leave etc.) of these contractors. So in a way, by exempting Uber from these rules, but not others, society is handing out a subsidy for both the passengers and drivers.</text><parent_chain><item><author>Wolfenstein98k</author><text>Good. The users and the drivers both wanted this.&lt;p&gt;You may dislike hearing this, but it takes a lot to inject yourself into that arrangement and massively increase the cost because you want it done differently.&lt;p&gt;I recognise that it appears to create &amp;quot;rules for thee but not for me&amp;quot; for these companies, but when they are so thoroughly satisfying both their customers and their workers, you should ask yourself if forcing them into the existing regulatory framework is the right equilibrium to shoot for.</text></item></parent_chain></comment><story><title>California Voters Exempt Uber, Lyft, DoorDash from Having to Reclassify Drivers</title><url>https://www.wsj.com/articles/california-voters-exempt-uber-lyft-doordash-from-having-to-reclassify-drivers-11604476276</url></story>
<instructions>Your goal is to analyze the following comment and estimate how highly it will be upvoted by the Hacker News community.</instructions><comment><author>snorrah</author><text>Apparently some drivers did not want this.&lt;p&gt;“Drivers and labor groups opposed Prop 22, saying it would allow companies to sidestep their obligations to provide benefits and standard minimum wages to their workers even as they make billions.” From &lt;a href=&quot;https:&amp;#x2F;&amp;#x2F;www.theguardian.com&amp;#x2F;us-news&amp;#x2F;2020&amp;#x2F;nov&amp;#x2F;04&amp;#x2F;california-election-voters-prop-22-uber-lyft&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;https:&amp;#x2F;&amp;#x2F;www.theguardian.com&amp;#x2F;us-news&amp;#x2F;2020&amp;#x2F;nov&amp;#x2F;04&amp;#x2F;california-e...&lt;/a&gt;</text><parent_chain><item><author>Wolfenstein98k</author><text>Good. The users and the drivers both wanted this.&lt;p&gt;You may dislike hearing this, but it takes a lot to inject yourself into that arrangement and massively increase the cost because you want it done differently.&lt;p&gt;I recognise that it appears to create &amp;quot;rules for thee but not for me&amp;quot; for these companies, but when they are so thoroughly satisfying both their customers and their workers, you should ask yourself if forcing them into the existing regulatory framework is the right equilibrium to shoot for.</text></item></parent_chain></comment><story><title>California Voters Exempt Uber, Lyft, DoorDash from Having to Reclassify Drivers</title><url>https://www.wsj.com/articles/california-voters-exempt-uber-lyft-doordash-from-having-to-reclassify-drivers-11604476276</url></story>