If this were true, how would you explain that both drivers and riders enter into the relationship voluntarily. Most of my uber drivers have been intelligent and knowledgeable about their options - quite the opposite of exploited and vulnerable.
I drove for Uber/Lyft for a while. I fully understood I was converting the equity in my car into meals and rent. Most people don't get that at all.
All jobs are a conversion of time/skill/knowledge/strength/etc. into a fungible token, money. That fungible token is then used to meet other needs: food and shelter being top of the list. In many parts of the developing world, a person cannot eat if they don't work that day.
In the best case scenario, you come out ahead - where the resources you put in are returned n-fold. An I-Banker grinding out 80+ hour weeks is giving up time with friends and family and perhaps compromising health. Is that person exploited?
Anybody who has driven for a ride sharing company understands that their vehicle will take on excess wear-and-tear and they have to pay for gas. They presumably compare against other jobs and pick ride sharing driver freely.
I would say it is rather condescending to refer to adults making informed decisions in their own self-interest as vulnerable and exploited.
That's like saying people presumably read EULAs before agreeing to them. We have a system where we pretend everyone is a rational actor while teaching them none of the skills that would let them actually behave as such. Is there any high school that covers economic topics like depreciation and opportunity cost?
What makes you think that?
If someone during the current period of time can’t figure out they can do similar money for less time at McDonald’s, they do not possess the financial literacy required to “get that”.