4 ms·
From the perspective of those who can afford surge pricing this is an improvement not for those who cant. Those who can't afford it are at the same position, t
by ffadfaafdf 11y ago
From the perspective of those who can afford surge pricing this is an improvement not for those who cant.
Those who can't afford it are at the same position, their status hasn't changed. Without it, nobody can use the taxis, with it, rich can use taxis, non-rich still can't. Surge pricing is strictly an improvement.
Another example: I provide food for a standard price. That price is determined by the weather. I can't control the weather, so I can't control the price. If the weather is poor, it affects production, the price goes up. I still guarantee to provide the food, yet less people can afford it. It would be strictly worse to stop production of food in case of poor weather.
- ThomPete 11y agoNo those who can't afford now have zero change of getting on where as before that they might be lucky to get one.
- ffadfaafdf 11y agoYou incorrectly assume the same number of drivers in both modes. With surge pricing there are more drivers, therefore more people get the drive, making it strictly better.
- ThomPete 11y agoNo I correctly assumes that in the first one chance is the only excluder, in the second one both chance and finance is.
- ffadfaafdf 11y agoNo I correctly assumes that in the first one chance is the only excluder I never even said that. I said you assumed the number of drivers stays the same, the argument you haven't addressed at all.
- ThomPete 11y agoI don't ignore any actual numbers they are just not an argument for anything. Before anyone had a chance. Now only those who can afford have a chance. Thats the primary difference.
- ffadfaafdf 11y agoChance plays no role here. It is a red-herring you invented and you can't see past it. Let me simplify it for you with a realistic example: Without surge pricing, nobody gets to drive, because the weather is so poor. With surge pricing some daring drivers will take some passengers. Strict improvement, because some people got to drive. without: p == 0 with: p > 0 What is the primary difference here? People drove. It surge pricing moral in this case? Yes, because the number of drivers on the road increased compared to non-surge pricing.
- ThomPete 11y agoYou are missing the point. First group everyone had a chance, second group only those who can afford it has one. So someone IS worse of because of surge pricing exactly because now they have no chance. It doesent help anything that of those who can afford it there are more cars. Thats what it means to make an ethical argument. Cherry picking your control group isnt.
- Sven7 11y agoRight. Just like how surge investing is strictly better for startups.