4 ms·

Headline grabber, but not much more. That the 'sharing economy' will not continue as today should be obvious though. Governments have to react to avoid a breakd

Headline grabber, but not much more. That the 'sharing economy' will not continue as today should be obvious though. Governments have to react to avoid a breakdown of regular services like taxis, assuming that they want to save them. More importantly, governments won't tolerate the tax evasion and externalisation of costs - like unemployment benefits, health care, etc. That's the main reason uber is cheaper, and it's simply not sustainable - all taxis replaced with 'volunteer' drivers makes the streets not just a bit less safer, but also will cause huge costs on welfare budgets that are not paid through the regular cut taken from salaries.

linkregister 10y ago
Lyft and Uber primarily market driving as a part-time way to get extra cash, not as a full-time job. Lyft has targeted typical, otherwise-employed drivers since its inception. Uber pivoted from a black car service to catch up with Lyft and its pooling service, Lyft Line. Though both services offer generous incentives to full-time drivers (extra cash per 1000 rides in a month), I would expect this to recede after enough part-time drivers can take over. When it's a side job, the lack of benefits don't matter. Many governments offer centralized health care that companies don't contribute to. I think you should limit your scope to the United States.