3 ms·

I think we have quite a fundamentally different view on morality but thanks for providing a thoughtful response. I disagree with most of it so not sure it's wor

by sambe 10y ago

I think we have quite a fundamentally different view on morality but thanks for providing a thoughtful response. I disagree with most of it so not sure it's worth going through each part ;) Only point I feel the need to address is the general imbalance in assumptions. In my experience, taxi drivers hide the meter, claim that hours are off-meter, claim there are special fees for certain journeys which don't exist, refuse to take rides they are obligated to take etc. Absolutely not rare at all in major European cities (and endemic in the developing world). I've lost count of how many times I've had it happen, attempted or seen other people targeted with it. This is mostly in major European cities. Formal complaints with the license number don't work ("we'll remind the driver of his obligations"). I don't find this especially unlikely behaviour - they are relatively unmonitored and unaccountable. They are distributed - no reputation as individuals. They deal with a lot of cash, they deal with people who don't know where they are or what the rules are. It's often one person's word against another's. I have plenty of first hand experience of misbehaviour, and I know regulatory body does little to address it. I find it odd that you assume the best of them - you even say they cannot do anything because a regulation exists. Obviously this is untrue. Yet with Uber your view is borderline conspiracy (despite them also having regulations!). Do you think all currently-unprofitable startups are laundering money on a large scale? Where did these billions and billions of dirty money come from? Is YC itself laundering dirty money through startups? They changed their org structure a few times recently - are they hiding something with this? I've seen multiple YC people write about tax efficiency too!

vmateixeira 10y ago
You're welcome! :) Thanks for replying back too. Always nice to see different points of view. Yes, agreed, I could have used better words other than cannot do anything because of regulation, of course they can and I'm sure some do. And I'm sure some Uber drivers out there do the exact same, maybe through different means. As I said before, good and bad professionals, you can find them everywhere. It's not something you can generalize. What I meant is that what distinguishes them from Uber is the fact they are government regulated. I know it may not stands as much, but if everything works as supposed to, it would work well. I'm also assuming you face a different reality (country) different than mine, so not sure if there's a point in going forward with this. Just to finalize on this, some fun fact: in my country every public passenger transportation needs to have a specific insurance (often expensive) and a professional driving license. This is mandatory for every public transportation (cabs included) but Uber. The list of exceptions goes on, and on... Regarding tax efficiency we share different views as well. And I'm not saying as part of a conspiracy theory of mine thar all unprofitable startups are laundering money on a large scale. A startup is usually expected to start profiting after 5 years and Uber is just far from that. I also try to put myself on an investor shoes and figure out If I'd invest my money on a company as such. My answer is no. Regarding this particular question: > Where did these billions and billions of dirty money come from? A little bit of conspiracy speculation now: Hidden in tax heavens and needed to be brought to light ;)
- sambe 10y ago
  > A startup is usually expected to start profiting after 5 years and Uber is just far from that There's obviously no hard-and-fast rule about 5 years. Other people value companies differently from you and have greater risk appetite. It's pretty normal for people to have different views on such things (like the morality of various tax arrangements!); that's not evidence of corruption. > A little bit of conspiracy speculation now: Hidden in tax heavens and needed to be brought to light ;) That's not where it came from, that's where it currently is (according to you). Even so, a tax heaven is not the same as money that needs laundering.
  - vmateixeira 10y ago
    > There's obviously no hard-and-fast rule about 5 years. Other people value companies differently from you and have greater risk appetite. It's pretty normal for people to have different views on such things (like the morality of various tax arrangements!); that's not evidence of corruption. Agreed. There's no hard rule on that. I just find it hard to believe someone would be up to investing a big chunk of money, for that much amount of time, without having any return. But yes, people choose on what to believe. I prefer to take it this way as I'm past Wonderland a while ago. Let's hope I'm wrong. > That's not where it came from, that's where it currently is (according to you). Even so, a tax heaven is not the same as money that needs laundering. I think it can be both actually. And it may need laundering in case there's no justification on where it's coming from. But again, this is all just conspiracy as Panama papers never happened.

by sambe 10y ago

vmateixeira 10y ago

You're welcome! :) Thanks for replying back too. Always nice to see different points of view. Yes, agreed, I could have used better words other than cannot do anything because of regulation, of course they can and I'm sure some do. And I'm sure some Uber drivers out there do the exact same, maybe through different means. As I said before, good and bad professionals, you can find them everywhere. It's not something you can generalize. What I meant is that what distinguishes them from Uber is the fact they are government regulated. I know it may not stands as much, but if everything works as supposed to, it would work well. I'm also assuming you face a different reality (country) different than mine, so not sure if there's a point in going forward with this. Just to finalize on this, some fun fact: in my country every public passenger transportation needs to have a specific insurance (often expensive) and a professional driving license. This is mandatory for every public transportation (cabs included) but Uber. The list of exceptions goes on, and on... Regarding tax efficiency we share different views as well. And I'm not saying as part of a conspiracy theory of mine thar all unprofitable startups are laundering money on a large scale. A startup is usually expected to start profiting after 5 years and Uber is just far from that. I also try to put myself on an investor shoes and figure out If I'd invest my money on a company as such. My answer is no. Regarding this particular question: > Where did these billions and billions of dirty money come from? A little bit of conspiracy speculation now: Hidden in tax heavens and needed to be brought to light ;)

sambe 10y ago
> A startup is usually expected to start profiting after 5 years and Uber is just far from that There's obviously no hard-and-fast rule about 5 years. Other people value companies differently from you and have greater risk appetite. It's pretty normal for people to have different views on such things (like the morality of various tax arrangements!); that's not evidence of corruption. > A little bit of conspiracy speculation now: Hidden in tax heavens and needed to be brought to light ;) That's not where it came from, that's where it currently is (according to you). Even so, a tax heaven is not the same as money that needs laundering.
- vmateixeira 10y ago
  > There's obviously no hard-and-fast rule about 5 years. Other people value companies differently from you and have greater risk appetite. It's pretty normal for people to have different views on such things (like the morality of various tax arrangements!); that's not evidence of corruption. Agreed. There's no hard rule on that. I just find it hard to believe someone would be up to investing a big chunk of money, for that much amount of time, without having any return. But yes, people choose on what to believe. I prefer to take it this way as I'm past Wonderland a while ago. Let's hope I'm wrong. > That's not where it came from, that's where it currently is (according to you). Even so, a tax heaven is not the same as money that needs laundering. I think it can be both actually. And it may need laundering in case there's no justification on where it's coming from. But again, this is all just conspiracy as Panama papers never happened.