3 ms·
That sounds like a good solution that would benefit drivers. Hopefully this can be realized
by dpeters 9y ago
That sounds like a good solution that would benefit drivers. Hopefully this can be realized
- andrewfromx 9y agoNo that sounds like a fake society kids think is reality. Capitalism is reality.
- nothrabannosir 9y agoSounds lovely and pithy, and Id love to agree with you. But is it, really? Didn’t Uber replace exactly this system, meaning it was, in fact, reality for decades?
- fullshark 9y agoYeah and the system was awful for consumers
- ExcelSaga 9y agoReality is what we choose to make of it. In the case of the US, reality is crony capitalism running a yearly trillion dollar deficit, billlions wasted on military contracts like Zumwalt, and overspending-underperforming healthcare. Let’s leave the buzzwords and ideology aside.
- heavenlyblue 9y agoI am waiting till someone builds a taxi app that would work exactly as IRC servers worked 20 years ago and Uber dies in it's own monocultural misery. Now that's capitalism.
- pfarnsworth 9y agoThey tried that in Austin. I think they had a year to grow market without Uber or Lyft, and once the ridesharing companies came back, the companies were decimated.
- IAmEveryone 9y agoKids have that insidious tendency to grow up, and to sometimes make their ideas become real.
- s73v3r_ 9y agoWhat part of "VCs subsidize riders" is Capitalism?
- malvosenior 9y agoAll of it? It's not like the VCs aren't expecting a return on investment. They're literally Venture Capitalists. You don't seem to equate investing (which this is) to capitalism, but you're mistaken.
- bertil 9y agoI haven’t been to Paris lately but my friends there describe it that way: Uber drivers there now need some hard-to-get and I believe limited license, so the drivers there are a lot less abundant, prices are higher and wait time longer. I wouldn’t be surprised if city hall economists publish some impact study on drivers’ revenue, or on congestions: both are hot topics there.
- vtail 9y agoI don’t think this is given - e.g., in NYC, Chicago, and SF, most cabs are driven by poor immigrants[1] and most rent (in economic terms) is extracted by medallion owners. [1] Nothing wrong with being an immigrant - I’m one myself, although not poor anymore. I’m just pointing out that pre-Uber system didn’t offer much protection either. Since driving is an easily obtainable skill with no differentiation whatsoever, driving for hire - be it a cab driver, truck driver, or Uber driver - will always be a low-earning job.
- sneak 9y agoThe current solution benefits drivers sufficiently to entice them to do it over a different job. I’m not sure why people feel that the current situation must be changed.
- davidf18 9y agoTry having some compassion for others. In NYC where I live there are a number of elderly on fixed incomes that need to get around by taxi/uber. Nobody forces people to drive uber/taxis or work at McDonalds, etc. But being elderly and infirm and for many being on a fixed income is forced on many. Don't you have any grandparents?
- rayvd 9y agoSounds good for the taxi cartels... not good for the drivers who would now have fewer job options and less control over accepting work on their terms. And of course a huge blow to consumers which is the whole point of Uber's existence anyway.
- s73v3r_ 9y agoDrivers don't have that now. They have extremely little control over what rides they can turn down, and most drivers barely break even. As for consumers, yes, it's generally felt as a blow when they have to start paying the actual costs of things, instead of coasting by on VC subsidized things.