4 ms·

The damage is already done though. Lawmakers and laymen will bring up this $3/h number constantly while making decisions that hurt Uber.

crankylinuxuser 9y ago
Uber's already a scam to begin with. It's not a bad thing to force them to compensate properly within the law. 1. It is employment, not a contract. They punish you if you don't do X hours a week. 2. They don't pay minimum wage, or other employment things like workers comp, unemployment tax, or others. 3. They actively seek to undermine all laws that protect the taxis and the citizens who ride. 4. They actively encourage lack of awareness with regarding commercial driving and the law. If one does not have commercial insurance, you are driving uninsured. If in a traffic incident, your license will be suspended. It's just another company trying to socialize the risk and privatize the profit. And they're socializing the risk on the poor and needy by giving them hope and screwing them in ways they don't understand.
- John_KZ 9y ago
  Exactly. At best, a company like Uber could provide a logistics service to taxi drivers and transport companies. Ride-sharing, optimized route planning, easy dispatching etc are all nice features and make the service cheaper by reducing overhead costs. However this is not what made Uber such a success. It was the unreasonably low prices it offered. How did it manage to do so? By externalizing a number of costs onto workers and society. And by the way, the article has a very deceptive title. Just because the author agreed to re-run the numbers with Ubers "hopeful" and "optimistic" assumtions doesn't mean the initial numbers where wrong or that the new numbers will be substantially better. They're still employing people for less than minimum wage.
  - malvosenior 9y ago
    > Ride-sharing, optimized route planning, easy dispatching etc are all nice features and make the service cheaper by reducing overhead costs. > However this is not what made Uber such a success. It was the unreasonably low prices it offered. Isn't it? I don't use Uber because it's cheaper I use it because I can have them come straight to my front door hailed from an app leveraging gps with continuous updates to their progress then have my destination programed into the driver's gps ultimately paying automatically with no hassle of cash or fighting over credit cards. The Uber experience was many light years beyond the existing taxi options (even in cities with good taxi system -- which is not many). That is why they are popular, not because they are cheap. I also think there's something extremely novel about letting users participate in the system as drivers. There was nothing like that before either.
    - lsc 9y ago
      >Isn't it? I don't use Uber because it's cheaper I use it because I can have them come straight to my front door hailed from an app leveraging gps with continuous updates to their progress then have my destination programed into the driver's gps ultimately paying automatically with no hassle of cash or fighting over credit cards. This is why I use uber the twice a month I need to get home from a bar or am otherwise unable to drive. And yeah, for twice-a-month rides, I'd be happy to pay full taxi rates; more, really. The thing is, because uber is so cheap, I've gotten rid of my car and I just use uber all the time. If uber raised their prices, I'd buy a car. Sure, I'd still use them twice a month, sure, but I use them twice a day right now. The upshot here is that about 1/30th of my uber rides are because the uber system provides a better experience than existing taxis in my area. 29/30ths of my uber rides are because they are so cheap and convenient that I pay only a small premium over owning a car to have someone else drive me all the time. If uber raises their prices? I'll just go buy myself a Honda. Uber will keep 1/30th or so of my existing business; 29/30ths of the business they get from me will evaporate after they cross that line where I go buy that Honda.

crankylinuxuser 9y ago

Uber's already a scam to begin with. It's not a bad thing to force them to compensate properly within the law. 1. It is employment, not a contract. They punish you if you don't do X hours a week. 2. They don't pay minimum wage, or other employment things like workers comp, unemployment tax, or others. 3. They actively seek to undermine all laws that protect the taxis and the citizens who ride. 4. They actively encourage lack of awareness with regarding commercial driving and the law. If one does not have commercial insurance, you are driving uninsured. If in a traffic incident, your license will be suspended. It's just another company trying to socialize the risk and privatize the profit. And they're socializing the risk on the poor and needy by giving them hope and screwing them in ways they don't understand.

John_KZ 9y ago
Exactly. At best, a company like Uber could provide a logistics service to taxi drivers and transport companies. Ride-sharing, optimized route planning, easy dispatching etc are all nice features and make the service cheaper by reducing overhead costs. However this is not what made Uber such a success. It was the unreasonably low prices it offered. How did it manage to do so? By externalizing a number of costs onto workers and society. And by the way, the article has a very deceptive title. Just because the author agreed to re-run the numbers with Ubers "hopeful" and "optimistic" assumtions doesn't mean the initial numbers where wrong or that the new numbers will be substantially better. They're still employing people for less than minimum wage.
- malvosenior 9y ago
  > Ride-sharing, optimized route planning, easy dispatching etc are all nice features and make the service cheaper by reducing overhead costs. > However this is not what made Uber such a success. It was the unreasonably low prices it offered. Isn't it? I don't use Uber because it's cheaper I use it because I can have them come straight to my front door hailed from an app leveraging gps with continuous updates to their progress then have my destination programed into the driver's gps ultimately paying automatically with no hassle of cash or fighting over credit cards. The Uber experience was many light years beyond the existing taxi options (even in cities with good taxi system -- which is not many). That is why they are popular, not because they are cheap. I also think there's something extremely novel about letting users participate in the system as drivers. There was nothing like that before either.
  - lsc 9y ago
    >Isn't it? I don't use Uber because it's cheaper I use it because I can have them come straight to my front door hailed from an app leveraging gps with continuous updates to their progress then have my destination programed into the driver's gps ultimately paying automatically with no hassle of cash or fighting over credit cards. This is why I use uber the twice a month I need to get home from a bar or am otherwise unable to drive. And yeah, for twice-a-month rides, I'd be happy to pay full taxi rates; more, really. The thing is, because uber is so cheap, I've gotten rid of my car and I just use uber all the time. If uber raised their prices, I'd buy a car. Sure, I'd still use them twice a month, sure, but I use them twice a day right now. The upshot here is that about 1/30th of my uber rides are because the uber system provides a better experience than existing taxis in my area. 29/30ths of my uber rides are because they are so cheap and convenient that I pay only a small premium over owning a car to have someone else drive me all the time. If uber raises their prices? I'll just go buy myself a Honda. Uber will keep 1/30th or so of my existing business; 29/30ths of the business they get from me will evaporate after they cross that line where I go buy that Honda.