I spent two weeks delivering for Uber Eats and made $4.40 per hour

TLDR Uber pays 4.4$ per hour, local competitor 17.9$

remind me again, why we need this shady company in Europe?

... or anywhere else.

To be fair uber eats is quite a different to the uber core service. I didn't even know that uber eats had any significant market share.

A possible explanation for the lack of orders they describe would be that Uber Eats doesn't have significant market share.

What do you mean "to be fair"? You're touching none of the facts. You just seem like a fanboy.

Who's forcing those people to work for uber, if those other companies are ostensibly paying better?

It sounds (from the article) that Uber is "flexible" about immigration rules.

Thanks for answering that!

So it looks like those higher paying jobs are not actually available for a large part of the Uber Eats workforce? How would those people benefit from being forbidden from working (= minimum wage)?

Well, Uber might eliminate the other companies one way or another.

So in the end if there were no migrants in Sweden then there would be no problem with low wages.

Let's say some pawnbroker is "flexible" about the provenance of goods. How do thieves benefit from being forbidden from selling to him?

Everybody is using Uber eats as a consumer...

> How would those people benefit from being forbidden from working

You are asking the wrong question. The real question is how can swedes prevent yet another unskilled job from being utterly annihilated by globalization in action?

Before Uber and undocumented migrants arriving in droves, those lines of unskilled work had better condition, quality of life. With the unfair competition of illegally employed undocumented migrants working for peanuts, it's only a matter of time before all other delivery companies shut their doors and bail. Then we'll end up with yet another job lost at the globalist hands. How much can we continue losing to globalisation? Everything, until the entire Western world has become as poor as the third world, save for the low % of SV entrepreneurs and VC?

Ideally, in a free society, laws are upheld by police enforcement. Thieves would therefore be unable to sell their products to a pawnshop, and the pawnshop would be unable to fence these products.

Of course, a society might fail with that goal but that doesn't make the goal invalid or non-existent.

Why would the Swedes want to do that?

Productivity ultimately drives standards of living.

Are you alluding to Consumer Surplus? (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economic_surplus)