3 ms·
But then at least you build equity on the car, right? Also, if you already own a suitable vehicle (which is arguably easier than owning a medallion), you wouldn
by ralmeida 9y ago
But then at least you build equity on the car, right? Also, if you already own a suitable vehicle (which is arguably easier than owning a medallion), you wouldn't need the mortgage?
- chx 9y agoThe medallion was a safe investment until Uber broke the law and got away with it. It makes no sense to "build equity" in a car since the car is depreciating very fast especially if you use it a lot for example because you are driving it to serve your debt to Uber.
- ralmeida 9y agoIt doesn't matter whether the medallion is a safe investment or not. Wikipedia tells me a NYC medallion was worth around 500k in late 2016. Median household income in NYC is around 50k, so that's 10 whole years of gross salary. The truth is that the average person is not able to afford to drive a taxi without renting the medallion. Even building equity on a quickly depreciating asset such as a car used for Uber is better in terms of not having to pay to work. Also, a Uber loan would not be the only way to get a car to drive for Uber. Even if you have no means to finance the car for yourself, many more people own a Uber-suitable car than a taxi medallion, so the price you'd have to pay to work for Uber would in any case be lower. The original discussion was whether Uber or taxis would be more worker-restrictive. I don't think driving a Uber gives total freedom, but I fail to see how driving a taxi is any better for the worker.