4 ms·

No, I wouldn't think it was unfair if they presented a price that was more because of <insert some reason here>, and then I decided not to pay it because I didn

No, I wouldn't think it was unfair if they presented a price that was more because of <insert some reason here>, and then I decided not to pay it because I didn't think their service was was worth that price. If you don't like what Uber is charging you, then don't take Uber. You can consider whatever constraints you like when determining the price you're willing to pay: convenience, time, cost, cleanliness, location, whathaveyou. Maybe you value your time less than the cost of an Uber, so you can then walk to your destination. You ripped off Uber then by using your two perfectly good feet, and showed those capitalist fatcats by not even using their service! The comparison to a serious hurt child is not an appropriate comparison (also, "think of the children!"), because the service is not fungible in that case. Is someone going to show up and make the same arguments for why people with higher incomes shouldn't pay higher taxes? If there's nothing wrong with progressive taxation, then there's nothing wrong with progressive pricing, and the only difference is that you're forced the pay taxes while you're not forced to purchase services from any given vendor.

sushid 9y ago
First, you're basing your argument on a mistaken premise that progressive taxation is okay. Second, it's relatively clear that you're going to be paying a certain rate in taxes, whereas your Uber prices can now have a huge, unforeseen jump in pricing because <insert personal reason here>. It's the difference between knowing you have to pay a higher rate because you're not a "Shopper's club member" vs. having an arbitrary fee added to your grocery at checkout because you're carrying a Louis Vuitton bag. And I'm not arguing this from a purely economics perspective. Yes, I know discriminatory pricing has its place in our society today and yes, I know it's profit maximizing, "fair," etc. But what's different here is that unlike airlines that have an algorithm deciding the same price for anyone buying that seat at that particular time, Uber can discriminate against you for very personal reasons, or general reasons that can discriminate against the racial makeup of a neighborhood, the disabled, etc. Hats off to your sense of duty to capitalism that'd make Milton Friedman proud, but the world doesn't work like an Econ 101 textbook. If Uber's profit maximizing algorithm is discriminatory against protected classes, it's illegal. If it's profit maximizing by overcharging people lulled into usage due to habit, dying phones, etc. it's still predatory. P.S. regarding your "think of the children" critique, I'm simply offering a direct counterexample to your "whatever price you pay and agree to == not getting ripped off." According to you, it does seem like you can be ripped off after all, even at a price you were willing to pay.

sushid 9y ago

First, you're basing your argument on a mistaken premise that progressive taxation is okay. Second, it's relatively clear that you're going to be paying a certain rate in taxes, whereas your Uber prices can now have a huge, unforeseen jump in pricing because <insert personal reason here>. It's the difference between knowing you have to pay a higher rate because you're not a "Shopper's club member" vs. having an arbitrary fee added to your grocery at checkout because you're carrying a Louis Vuitton bag. And I'm not arguing this from a purely economics perspective. Yes, I know discriminatory pricing has its place in our society today and yes, I know it's profit maximizing, "fair," etc. But what's different here is that unlike airlines that have an algorithm deciding the same price for anyone buying that seat at that particular time, Uber can discriminate against you for very personal reasons, or general reasons that can discriminate against the racial makeup of a neighborhood, the disabled, etc. Hats off to your sense of duty to capitalism that'd make Milton Friedman proud, but the world doesn't work like an Econ 101 textbook. If Uber's profit maximizing algorithm is discriminatory against protected classes, it's illegal. If it's profit maximizing by overcharging people lulled into usage due to habit, dying phones, etc. it's still predatory. P.S. regarding your "think of the children" critique, I'm simply offering a direct counterexample to your "whatever price you pay and agree to == not getting ripped off." According to you, it does seem like you can be ripped off after all, even at a price you were willing to pay.