????亞馬遜也完全可以跟個風，顯著提高自己的利潤水平。它為什么要搞自己的倉庫并且雇那么多工作人員呢？它完全也可以把自己改造成一個中介，通過介紹買賣來提成——完全不需要儲存書籍或其他商品。

無責任，大利潤

????那么，這種業務模式有什么不對的地方？其實沒有任何問題，只要你不在乎它猶如“狂野西部”的商業生態系統。對于那些擁有大型實體業務的企業來說，最妙的一點是你能向他們征稅并且監管他們，要求他們遵守勞動法，做所有其他你在“新經濟時代”逐漸無法做的事情。

????比如，盡管Airbnb在網站上明文要求“房東們”必須要遵守殘疾人法和反歧視法，但相較于一家連鎖酒店，讓他們執行這些法律的難度要大得多。很多已經通過旅館稅和占用稅的城市和縣都不會向Airbnb征收這些稅，該公司最終只同意在極少數城市代收稅款，而履行稅法的義務則完全在個體“房東”一方。

????有些法律規定了人們的工作時間（特別是交通業）。這些法規旨在保護駕駛員及他人免于遭受交通事故。但愿政府能夠督促個體承包商遵守這些法規。另外，不要指望這些公司繳納失業保險和社保金，因為大多數為這些公司工作的人都是獨立承包商，而不是雇員。

????提供實際產品和服務的企業還有一個好處，就是一旦出了問題，畢竟會有一個實體出來采取補救措施。比如，如果Webvan給消費者提供了變質產品或肉類，就得為此負責。諾德斯特龍（Norstrom）等零售商會給產品質量提供質保，但易趣不會。有一些租車公司在雇傭和管理駕駛員方面已經建立了良好的信用，一旦出了問題也愿意賠錢。而Uber就不會這樣做——不過如果打起官司，會是什么結果還不好說。酒店一般都交了責任保險，也有必要的財務手段，一旦住客受到員工侮辱、傷害或其它安全問題，酒店會出面賠償損失。Airbnb則不會這樣，雖然該公司有大量經濟資源，但是作為一家“非運營商”，不管你在短租期內出了什么問題，它早已把任何責任推卸得一干二凈。

????這樣推卸責任，包括推卸責任保險、遵守政府法規和繳納工資稅等責任，的確會節省大量的成本。這使得這些所謂“新經濟”公司得以獲得天生的、或許也是不公平的競爭優勢。

????企業推卸對員工的責任，削減成本，早已是老生常談。很多年前，就有雇主覺得雇傭員工是件頭痛的事。既要繳納工資稅，又要花時間去招聘，如果你炒了人家的魷魚，還要小心人家以不當解聘或是歧視為由把你告上法庭。所以有不少企業裁掉了不少員工，把他們的工作交給臨時性支持機構和承包商來完成，這也就是所謂“非正規雇傭”發展得如此之快的原因之一。現在市場上甚至出現了一些協會，代表的正是這個行業中許多公司的利益。

????美國國稅局和各州就業服務部門擔心，他們將無法掌握個體承包商的失業率和工資稅情況。所以他們制定了一份清單，以確認為某些公司工作的“非雇員”究竟是不是雇員，然后進行審計以確保雇員獲得合理待遇。

????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.