4 ms·

The Stanford paper estimates gross earning to be around $18 per hour and all expenses including insurance, downtime, gasoline and depreciation (but not fines) a

The Stanford paper estimates gross earning to be around $18 per hour and all expenses including insurance, downtime, gasoline and depreciation (but not fines) at $5 per hour. This gives net earnings of $13 per hour. To get the $5 per hour in expenses they use 25 cents per mile for those expenses and 20 miles driven per hour. This is all explained on page 36 of the Standford paper which I think is excellent but is primarily concerned with understanding the gender earnings gap not the distribution of net earnings.

skookumchuck 9y ago
The IRS mileage rate is $0.545 per mile, and is supposed to be a realistic average for car expenses. Edit: per mile, not per hour. Oops! fixed the rate, too
- tgb 9y ago
  $0.56 per mile not hour! (Though I see $0.545 per mile [1].) [1] https://www.irs.gov/newsroom/standard-mileage-rates-for-2018-up-from-rates-for-2017 https://www.irs.gov/newsroom/standard-mileage-rates-for-2018...
  - deleted 9y ago
    [deleted]
- ghaff 9y ago
  It's supposedly more or less an average across car types and includes a percentage of fixed costs however. It's almost certainly high for a driver who would own a car anyway and has an economical vehicle that optimizes for Uber driving. It's going to be a range depending on the driver though 25 cents per mile (all miles, not just those with a passenger) is probably near the bottom end.
  - skookumchuck 9y ago
    If I was an Uber driver, that's the rate I'd use for tax accounting purposes.
- fastball 9y ago
  That's for any car though. Most Uber drivers are driving Priuses or similar and therefore have much lower costs.
  - deleted 9y ago
    [deleted]
  - skookumchuck 9y ago
    The study would do well to use such a figure, as it is objective and sets a reasonable upper bound on the costs.
    - fastball 9y ago
      Why is it better to use a upper bound rather than a more realistic estimate?
      - skookumchuck 9y ago
        Because it is 1) conservative and 2) a "realistic" figure has unknown variance.

skookumchuck 9y ago

The IRS mileage rate is $0.545 per mile, and is supposed to be a realistic average for car expenses. Edit: per mile, not per hour. Oops! fixed the rate, too

tgb 9y ago
$0.56 per mile not hour! (Though I see $0.545 per mile [1].) [1] https://www.irs.gov/newsroom/standard-mileage-rates-for-2018-up-from-rates-for-2017 https://www.irs.gov/newsroom/standard-mileage-rates-for-2018...
- deleted 9y ago
  [deleted]
ghaff 9y ago
It's supposedly more or less an average across car types and includes a percentage of fixed costs however. It's almost certainly high for a driver who would own a car anyway and has an economical vehicle that optimizes for Uber driving. It's going to be a range depending on the driver though 25 cents per mile (all miles, not just those with a passenger) is probably near the bottom end.
- skookumchuck 9y ago
  If I was an Uber driver, that's the rate I'd use for tax accounting purposes.
fastball 9y ago
That's for any car though. Most Uber drivers are driving Priuses or similar and therefore have much lower costs.
- deleted 9y ago
  [deleted]
- skookumchuck 9y ago
  The study would do well to use such a figure, as it is objective and sets a reasonable upper bound on the costs.
  - fastball 9y ago
    Why is it better to use a upper bound rather than a more realistic estimate?
    - skookumchuck 9y ago
      Because it is 1) conservative and 2) a "realistic" figure has unknown variance.