3 ms·

What though, is wrong with it? As far as I can see, simply that the same company helps them get the loan is the same one that pays them to drive. And also that

• calvinbhai 10y ago
  I agree with you that these drivers are getting loans only because Uber and its partners are willing give, and in return gobble up a huge share of the driver's earnings. But, isn't that like asking 'whats wrong in giving subprime loans?' The way I see it, at least for Uber drivers in US getting such loans from Santander+Uber, its a raw deal. In 4-6 years if they pay off the car as earnings continue to slide, they'll be holding onto a car which has 200K+ to 400K+ miles on it and worth not much. And in 4 years there's a very very good possibility that short haul rides could be fully autonomous.
  • EdHominem 10y ago
    Well, it's certainly a deal than neither of us would take, but if the person bought intelligently and drove conservatively, it could be a win for them. Certainly to the point where I don't want to forbid them making that contract if they see fit. And the fact that Uber profits as well doesn't change the driver's rights in dealing with them. If the driver got a separate loan from the bank we wouldn't be having this discussion. Smart or not, it's their right. The issue is all in the one company having too much control - like miners in a company town being under the thumb of a landlord and boss who were the same and shared information about the employee. That does bother me and I might want to pass a law to forbid that, to ensure there's a wall between those roles.