3 ms·

The right way to solve this is not via legislation, nor it is to expect Uber to be "morally upstanding" Corporations are amoral, always have been, always will

by syshum 10y ago

The right way to solve this is not via legislation, nor it is to expect Uber to be "morally upstanding" Corporations are amoral, always have been, always will be. The right way to solve this for people to stop using Uber, stop expecting the ultra low rates, just stop The way to force morality upon corporations is for the CONSUMERS to be moral, and stop using the products and services of corporations that have policies they disagree with. I love it when i hear people bitch about how terrible uber treats its drivers but continue to use them as their primary mode of transportation. THEY ARE PART OF THE PROBLEM. As as example, I dislike Walmart, I have not stepped foot in a Walmart store in more than a decade. If more people would vote with their wallet companies would change their policies, instead they look to government to use violence for force companies to change because anything else would inconvenience them. it is the lazy way out.

hackuser 10y ago
> Corporations are amoral, always have been, always will be. That's not true; all corporations make moral choices, probably even Uber. > The right way to solve this is not via legislation What's wrong with legislation? It's knee-jerk to reject it, but I like the democratic way of solving problems. > The way to force morality upon corporations is for the CONSUMERS to be moral Why is millions of individuals all making a moral choice more likely than one company doing it? How often does this work? The 'free market' assumes people will act in their own interests; where that invisible hand fails to deliver, such as situations like this one, we use laws and regulations to correct the situation.
- syshum 10y ago
  >That's not true; all corporations make moral choices, probably even Uber. Morality is a human construct, Corporations are not people as such can not have Morality. People make moral choices. >>What's wrong with legislation? It's knee-jerk to reject it, but I like the democratic way of solving problems. There is soo much wrong here. First off, legislation often makes situation worse, and rarely improves things. After all Uber is a direct reaction to regulation of Taxi's, People wanted a less regulation more convenient service for their transportation needs, Regulation of Uber will just result in something else as people attempt to get out from under the government thumb. Further the call for regulation is a itself a knee jerk emotional reaction to a perceived injustice. Finally I do not like the "democratic way". I believe in individuality, not collectivism, I do not believe 51% of the population gets to dictate what the other 49% do or cant do. >The 'free market' assumes people will act in their own interests; where that invisible hand fails to deliver, I do not believe it is failing to deliver, clearly the people the drive for Uber believe driving for Uber is better than the other options they have, better than other jobs that are open to them. Simple because you do not like their choice or because you perceive it as "unfair" does not mean the people are not acting in their own interests. Shitty choices are still choices Where laws and regulation should come into play is for Fraud, false advertisement, and contract violations. All of which Uber has been accused of and it should be investigated. I also believe we should have strong Truth in Advertising laws to prevent companies like Uber from inflating income numbers, or getting people to sign terrible leasing programs like the ones Uber has. This would be good use of government regulation Requiring all kind of Employment regulations and other types of regulation people call for is not. >we use laws and regulations to correct the situation. We should not, nor is it effect Law and regulations should only be there to prevent direct physical harm, theft and fraud. Nothing else. They should not protect people from their own stupidity, they should not attempt to make the world subjectivity "fair" which is impossible as every person has a different definition of what is "fair" The only proper role of government is to ensure people are honestly transacting with each free from coercive threats of violence, or actual violence between persons. Beyond that any action by government ceases to be defensive in nature and becomes Aggressive and is IMO unethical
  - hackuser 10y ago
    There are many philosophical principles here, but not much that seems related to the reality of people, businesses, or governments. I'll just say this: Theory is a useful servant but a bad master, liable to produce orthodox defenders of every variety of the faith. - Harry Guntrip (attributed)
    - syshum 10y ago
      Important principles may, and must, be inflexible. -- Abraham Lincoln Government should be based on principles...

by syshum 10y ago

hackuser 10y ago

> Corporations are amoral, always have been, always will be. That's not true; all corporations make moral choices, probably even Uber. > The right way to solve this is not via legislation What's wrong with legislation? It's knee-jerk to reject it, but I like the democratic way of solving problems. > The way to force morality upon corporations is for the CONSUMERS to be moral Why is millions of individuals all making a moral choice more likely than one company doing it? How often does this work? The 'free market' assumes people will act in their own interests; where that invisible hand fails to deliver, such as situations like this one, we use laws and regulations to correct the situation.

syshum 10y ago
>That's not true; all corporations make moral choices, probably even Uber. Morality is a human construct, Corporations are not people as such can not have Morality. People make moral choices. >>What's wrong with legislation? It's knee-jerk to reject it, but I like the democratic way of solving problems. There is soo much wrong here. First off, legislation often makes situation worse, and rarely improves things. After all Uber is a direct reaction to regulation of Taxi's, People wanted a less regulation more convenient service for their transportation needs, Regulation of Uber will just result in something else as people attempt to get out from under the government thumb. Further the call for regulation is a itself a knee jerk emotional reaction to a perceived injustice. Finally I do not like the "democratic way". I believe in individuality, not collectivism, I do not believe 51% of the population gets to dictate what the other 49% do or cant do. >The 'free market' assumes people will act in their own interests; where that invisible hand fails to deliver, I do not believe it is failing to deliver, clearly the people the drive for Uber believe driving for Uber is better than the other options they have, better than other jobs that are open to them. Simple because you do not like their choice or because you perceive it as "unfair" does not mean the people are not acting in their own interests. Shitty choices are still choices Where laws and regulation should come into play is for Fraud, false advertisement, and contract violations. All of which Uber has been accused of and it should be investigated. I also believe we should have strong Truth in Advertising laws to prevent companies like Uber from inflating income numbers, or getting people to sign terrible leasing programs like the ones Uber has. This would be good use of government regulation Requiring all kind of Employment regulations and other types of regulation people call for is not. >we use laws and regulations to correct the situation. We should not, nor is it effect Law and regulations should only be there to prevent direct physical harm, theft and fraud. Nothing else. They should not protect people from their own stupidity, they should not attempt to make the world subjectivity "fair" which is impossible as every person has a different definition of what is "fair" The only proper role of government is to ensure people are honestly transacting with each free from coercive threats of violence, or actual violence between persons. Beyond that any action by government ceases to be defensive in nature and becomes Aggressive and is IMO unethical
- hackuser 10y ago
  There are many philosophical principles here, but not much that seems related to the reality of people, businesses, or governments. I'll just say this: Theory is a useful servant but a bad master, liable to produce orthodox defenders of every variety of the faith. - Harry Guntrip (attributed)
  - syshum 10y ago
    Important principles may, and must, be inflexible. -- Abraham Lincoln Government should be based on principles...