3 ms·

So society is supposed to subsidize Uber‘s continued existence? That‘s perverted and unacceptable.

• bhupy 7y ago
  > So society is supposed to subsidize Uber‘s continued existence? That‘s perverted and unacceptable. Of course! Why should the government provide health insurance? Doing so allows employers to shirk their responsibility to provide health insurance to their workers. I think we'd both agree that government-run health insurance obviating the need for businesses to provide their employees health insurance is neither perverted nor unacceptable. Why not then apply the same thinking to the concept of wages in general? At the end of the day, we agree as a society that there's a minimum standard of living that everyone ought to enjoy, and welfare is our way of ensuring that. That there are some professions (like rideshare drivers) in which the pay is too low to maintain a minimum standard of living sounds like a welfare problem. And remember, society would be subsidizing Uber/Lyft via wage floors anyway, they will continue to exist (albeit only available to richer consumers), but the rich and the poor pay equally to maintain a minimum standard of living for drivers, making it function like a regressive tax. Also keep in mind that Uber's margins are razor-thin as things currently stand, since there is effective competition in Lyft et al.