9 ms·

Uber and Lyft don't have a right to exist

86 points by ausbah 7y ago

jimmaswell 7y ago
Maybe CA doing stuff like sending itself back into the dark ages of taxis will prompt tech to take up root in other states more. I can only hope.
- zzzeek 7y ago
  the problem is that in order for you to have your convenient uber/lyft car, people are forced into poverty and homelessness as these jobs do not pay enough. background on homeless Uber drivers: https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2017/jun/17/uber-drivers-homeless-assault-travis-kalanick https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2017/jun/17/uber-drivers...
  - jimmaswell 7y ago
    If these labor laws prevent that, then these people allegedly being forced into poverty and homelessness by uber/lyft would just get traditional minimum wage jobs instead which are plentiful at the moment. CA is at its lowest unemployment rate right now. Yet people are still taking these jobs over more traditional ones. So apparently the problem exists in both cases and a more general solution is in order than trying to get rid of contracting-like jobs which other comments point out uber/lyft certainly are (work for competitors simultaneously, no set hours, etc).
    - zzzeek 7y ago
      > would just get traditional minimum wage jobs instead which are plentiful at the moment. in which case they would not be Uber/lyft drivers and you would not have the convenience of these services available to you, back into the "dark ages of taxis" . > Yet people are still taking these jobs over more traditional ones. yes, and they are living below the poverty level by doing so. The fact remains that your experience of convenient uber/lyft rides depends upon people who willingly or not place themselves into poverty-level wages. For the moment, your convenience requires that people suffer in poverty. OTOH, if regulations were imposed such that Uber/Lyft had to raise their prices, then you can have the convenience of these services, at a higher cost (more likely though, it would be simply be a regular low-margin business like taxis and supermarkets and no longer profitable to investors), and it would not require poverty-level workers in order to achieve it. This is the purpose of the minimum wage - so that the job market isn't crowded with jobs that do not provide a living wage.
      - jimmaswell 7y ago
        My point is gig jobs must not be the real problem here, so the solution to the general problem isn't tanking the gig economy. If uber and lyft were so bad then people would be taking those regulated jobs that are available instead. I wouldn't mind if uber/lyft prices went up some to pay the employees better but I don't see it as a moral evil to make side jobs available where you're not paid for time doing nothing because there's not a job yet. Re: healthcare it should just be single payer and not tied to employment.
kerng 7y ago
They aren't contractors, and they are not employees. That's why its called "gig economy".
bdcravens 7y ago
If they get classified as employees, does that mean the companies will have more control over how they do their job? I've caught multiple drivers bypassing toll roads (causing a much longer trip) even though Uber includes the toll fee in what they charge me.
- justforyou 7y ago
  Uber doesn't really care about your safety, the quality of the ride, or your drivers behavior unless any of these things cause significant PR disasters and result in a very large number of users leaving the platform. This wouldn't change if the drivers were classified as employees. Also, do you have any proof drivers are actually able to pocket those missed tolls? Seems like a win/win, drivers get higher fare due to time, and Uber pockets toll. Why should Uber care?
  - SllX 7y ago
    The driver would have to be the one paying the toll, so any money collected for a toll road by Uber would have to go to the driver, otherwise it’s just an arbitrary fee Uber decided to collect, not really a charge for the toll.
- SllX 7y ago
  They do. You in the passenger seat have some control, you can make their lives pretty difficult on the trip, you can demand that they take the toll road since you’re paying for it anyway. Appeal to Uber for a credit on those trips. I don’t know the process for Uber, but on Lyft I had someone bypass me entirely, drive just far enough away to give “me” a ride and collect partial credit, then “drop me off”. Lyft credited me, changed my rating on the driver (I fat fingered the rating on my way to call another car, I only call Lyfts when I’m in a hurry, not when I have all the time in the world), and gave me a guarantee that I would never see that driver again. I hope they also took notes on the scam that driver was running, but I stopped caring once I got my money back. If Uber gives a damn about customer retention, which they should, they predicated their entire business model on being the biggest, only game in town, you should expect a similar result.
jackschultz 7y ago
There's constant arguments about this, whether a driver for Lyft / Uber, or a delivery driver of Grubhub, Doordash, UberEats, is either an employee or contractor. And yet, I haven't seen talk of the creation of a new type of worker, one for the gig economy. I get that there's a big difficulty in creating these laws, with politicians who don't know exactly what the solution is, but someone needs to start by saying look, these gig economy workers are neither "employees" or "contractors" with the current law definitions, so we're going to create a new definition of worker geared towards these cases which makes sure employees aren't being taken advantage of, but also makes it possible for these companies to continue.
- djrogers 7y ago
  That would require legislators who are independent of the interests on both sides of the problem - something we rarely see here.
  - eternalban 7y ago
    That is the general condition. It is possible that e.g. FLSA was passed due to the political calculations of the capitalist class, but it did happen. Incidentally, the "Gig Economy" has all the necessary features to serve as the Corporate Neoliberal version of pseudo-Communist China's Social Credit System. Possibly that may serve as motivation to address GP's excellent point regarding a new class of workers and the necessity to craft new laws. [FLSA]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fair_Labor_Standards_Act_of_1938 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fair_Labor_Standards_Act_of_19...
- b_tterc_p 7y ago
  Well that’s probably not possible because each gig market is different. Healthcare is the biggest item but seems unlikely to budge. Payments for, say, a driver vs. a dog walker are going to vary significantly due to different scheduling expectations, different time values, etc. It’s not clear what is meant by making it possible for these companies to continue either, as most of these companies are not currently running a profitable business.
- 7y ago
dagnysdildo 7y ago
So close and yet so far. No business or corporation has an inherent right to exist, and if you can only turn a profit by shafting the people who work for you then you have no business in business.
- test6554 7y ago
  If someone performs a voluntary job without a gun to their heads, the assumption is that they are not being shafted. Or they are being shafted by life so hard that this represents less shafting that all their other options. Otherwise, if they had better options, why would they take the job?
  - dagnysdildo 7y ago
    There's no such thing as a voluntary job when the "alternative" is poverty, homelessness, and slow death by starvation or preventable disease.
    - kortilla 7y ago
      So your proposal is to drive these corporations out of existence and push the people back into poverty?
      - dagnysdildo 7y ago
        Not all of them. Just the ones that shaft workers. If your business has nothing to hide it has nothing to fear.
sokoloff 7y ago
[California Assembly Bill 5] would suck Uber, Lyft, and other gig economy platforms out of their legal vacuum and into well-defined orbits of labor law. It would be doing so in a way that tracks with the reality of their businesses and a common-sense definition of what an “employee” is. I don't think that a common sense definition of what an "employee" is includes "show up to work whenever you want, take whatever breaks you want, knock off whenever you want, show up wherever you want, work for another company at the same instant you're working for us, get paid for jobs completed rather than hours worked, have a genuine prospect to show a profit or loss, use your own equipment" and likely several other key elements of the Uber/Lyft driver-company relationship. I agree they're not 100% independent either, but I tend to view them as more independent than employees.
- blueboo 7y ago
  They have process to discourage each of those so called key elements. To earn a living wage, drivers need to earn bonuses by driving at specific times, for at least a target number of rides per session. They’re not taking coding contracts ...
- lisper 7y ago
  No contractor is 100% independent. If I hire a plumber, they fix the pipes that I tell them to fix. They don't just do whatever they feel like doing. If you're 100% independent you're not a contractor, you're retired.
  - yojo 7y ago
    This is not a good analogy. The plumber is free to set their own rates, an uber driver cannot. No one can unilaterally fire the plumber from 50% of the plumbing market. Uber or Lyft can ban a driver at any time for any reason. You probably didn’t order up your plumber through PlumbersRUs. If you did, they would almost certainly be an employee of that entity.
    - sokoloff 7y ago
      Tow truck drivers are not employees of AAA.
tyingq 7y ago
The official rules[1] are somewhat ambiguous, so this might be an interesting Court battle. The key bit is probably "A worker is an employee when the business has the right to direct and control the work performed by the worker, even if that right is not exercised." [1] https://www.irs.gov/newsroom/understanding-employee-vs-contractor-designation https://www.irs.gov/newsroom/understanding-employee-vs-contr...
- sundaeofshock 7y ago
  That’s the federal definition. The State of California is codifying it’s own rules to remove the ambiguity.
  - tyingq 7y ago
    Is there some link to what the criteria is?
- lisper 7y ago
  This criterion is ridiculously out of touch with reality. I just hired some people to trim my trees. I told them exactly which trees to trim, in some cases, which specific limbs to cut off. That doesn't make the tree-trimmers my employees.
  - pwagland 7y ago
    The difference is that you are not "hiring" the tree trimmer 5 days a week, 52 weeks of the year. They have many "employers", and so are independent of all of them. An Uber/Lyft driver does not have many "employers", they only have 1/2, plus maybe their own other job.
    - lisper 7y ago
      > The difference is that you are not "hiring" the tree trimmer 5 days a week, 52 weeks of the year. Sure. But that's not what the text says. And BTW, the amount of time that an Uber/Lyft driver works is entirely up to them. They can work one day, take a month off, and then come back and work another day. Any Uber/Lyft driver who works 5 days a week, 52 weeks a year, is doing so because they choose to, not because they fear being fired if they don't.
nemothekid 7y ago
>To classify someone as an independent contractor, the court said, businesses must show that the worker is free from the control and direction of the employer; performs work that is outside the hirer’s core business; and customarily engages in “an independently established trade, occupation or business.” This is a bit unrelated, but how would this affect software contractors?
- bdcravens 7y ago
  It will impact fewer software contractors than we'd think: many contractors really aren't. You're a W2 employee of the placing agency, and they are sending you, their employee, to their client.
- pwagland 7y ago
  Interesting analogy. At least in the Netherlands, unless you have 3 or 4 contracts in a year, you are not really considered a contractor anyway, you are considered an employee. If you stay contracting more than 50% at a company for more than 2 years, you are not a consultant, you are just an expensive employee. I know that in Australia 20 years ago, there was a big push to make everyone contractors, to get rid of employee obligations, the rules were changed to be similar to NL now, but I don't know what has happened in the meantime.
halamadrid 7y ago
If you sign the petition be wary of this: I agree that Uber or its representatives may contact me by email, phone, or SMS at the email address or number I provide, including for marketing purposes.
paulsutter 7y ago
While it’s true that it’s bad for Uber it drivers are classified as employees, it’s also going to be bad for drivers. Why so much energy directed at punitive measures? Employee classification only benefits tax authorities who get to collect more money. Why we penalize hiring employees I have no idea but that’s how it works.
- Barrin92 7y ago
  > it’s also going to be bad for drivers how does this follow? Regular employees are entitled to minimum wage, overtime pay and reimbursements for work expenses. The latter in particular would finally put an end to Uber's business model of outsourcing maintenance and risk to drivers, costs which many drivers are very likely not fully aware of. Being treated as a regular employee, possible unionizing and being entitled to full benefits is a huge boon for working people.
  - paulsutter 7y ago
    Reclassification doesn’t create new money. Things that would actually help drivers: - Limit Uber's share of the fare to 10%. Or 5%. And the driver gets the rest - Let drivers set strict limits on where they are willing to pick up/drop off, etc - Let drivers set their price/terms Give drivers more control, not less. Making them employees gives them less control
    - Barrin92 7y ago
      a ridesharing service without drivers doesn't exist. Of course reclassification doesn't create new money, if the companies want to be able to operate they'll need to find it somewhere else. Maybe we could start with not making developers millionaires in their 20s and hiring 1k+ sales people for a company that makes a smartphone app. Literal price fixing might seem simple but seems like a bad market intervention in comparison to giving workers reasonable negotiating power and representation.
      - paulsutter 7y ago
einpoklum 7y ago
Uber and Lyft are gaming labor laws in order to get a cheap flexible workforce. To the extent that their business depends on doing so, then, yes, they don't have a right to exist. I wish drivers could organize and set up ride-hailing collectives, so that we would just cut out Uber and Lyft as the middle-men; prices might be higher because of wages, but it won't all feel like an anti-social scam - and drivers will be able to participate in managing their own lives and put in their professional input (together with consumer groups / regulators) into standard of conduct, service and safety.
stevenjgarner 7y ago
This would be a powerful promoter of autonomous vehicle technologies in ridehail companies. Interesting that if passed, Assembly Bill 5 would become law at about the time the Tesla Network might be implemented. Might actually have a very positive effect on Uber, Lyft et al, just not on their drivers.
Kapura 7y ago
I think this bill passing would be a good thing, because gig workers need legal protections, and in America most people are also dependent on their employer to help cover the cost of health insurance (another issue itself; healthcare should be free). I know people who are regular uber drivers in LA, and they certainly treat driving for uber like a "real" job. They try to work regular hours; they need to to be able to make rent. I believe the real issue is the distinct lack of investment in public transit infrastructure in the US. Uber and Lyft claim they're providing a valuable service. In developed nations cities build subways and bus routes to meet the needs of residents. America's philosophy seems to be to never provide a necessary service for free when somebody could be making a buck off it.
carapace 7y ago
I tend to bring this up on Uber/Lyft/etc threads, but it seems especially relevant here: "The Market Fairy Will Not Solve the Problems of Uber and Lyft" (2016) https://www.ianwelsh.net/the-market-fairy-will-not-solve-the-problems-of-uber-and-lyft/ https://www.ianwelsh.net/the-market-fairy-will-not-solve-the... > Here is the thing about Uber and Lyft (and much of the “sharing economy”). > They don’t pay the cost of their capital. > The wages they pay to their drivers are less than the depreciation of the cars and the expense of keeping the drivers fed, housed, and healthy. They pay less than minimum wage in most markets, and, in most markets, that is not enough to pay the costs of a car plus a human. > These business models are ways of draining capital from the economy and putting them into the hands of a few investors and executives. ... From the drivers' POV these companies are parasites.
b_tterc_p 7y ago
I think the part about financial incentives to work longer shifts is a low hanging fruit. This should not be allowed. It basically forces an employee like relationship for an individual to make a practical living (if even). If this were not allowed, uber would be forced to pay higher wages across the board.
- test6554 7y ago
  That's my one complaint. Penalizing drivers for rejecting rides. If you could truly be living your life and set multiple rideshare apps to notify you only when ride fares exceed X rate, then everyone would just set their minimum rate on all the apps and just take the most profitable fares that came their way.
matz1 7y ago
everyone should be a contractor anyway. Health care should be decoupled from employer.
- dehrmann 7y ago
  In theory, I'm ok with this, but we also need a stronger social safety net. There's still a certain amount of social responsibility that comes with employing someone full-time, even though it's not required by law. As long as the government can step in to fill the gap, this can work. What's tricky is that while there are benefits to business because now their business is business, not retaining workers longer than they should, it makes them cold and heartless. But we're humans, we don't respond will to that, and we want to be treated with dignity, even in business transactions.
beeschlenker 7y ago
...And neither do these guys... Soros child rape ring protected by Trump for $4 billion bribe, Pelosi $3b to "ensure safe passage over border". Rapists include Obama, Schumer, Cuomo, Buttgieg, DeBlasio, Theil, Dorsey, Bill Murray. Over 60 deaths from rapes in Buffalo Jan\'19, billions in payoffs. Listen to them do it here: Listen! to previously unprocessed footage now available [Soros, 0bama child rapes 15Jan 4-6am], Obama around 524: "Why is there so much blood? Someone get me something to clean the blood off my dick..." footage gets censored in LA, NYC, CHI, SF, BOS, DC...why are these wealthy high profile child rapists, who are caught in the act with no action by the FBI? *note: -> groups of links are multiple ways to get the same file -> 15JanCh3_347-528.avi https://drive.google.com/file/d/1Q8YeDzghf95FQrxBaMpXK4b-SfJYERs8/view?usp=sharing https://drive.google.com/file/d/1Q8YeDzghf95FQrxBaMpXK4b-SfJ... https://mega.nz/#!bTQwDQDA!jolSOqGR2Zomhtn7zIG0lGmqXSqe3KG1mO_7nKLrqNo https://mega.nz/#!bTQwDQDA!jolSOqGR2Zomhtn7zIG0lGmqXSqe3KG1m... 15JanCh3_528-545.avi https://drive.google.com/file/d/1DavyRFWTRv4_teHYewpQMwMCq6LDzb6Y/view?usp=sharing https://drive.google.com/file/d/1DavyRFWTRv4_teHYewpQMwMCq6L... https://mega.nz/#!DfBywKKR!llMUzB8DLM2Rcvm0QkOKdiE3PpCY5YeR3yJwrm9R_4U https://mega.nz/#!DfBywKKR!llMUzB8DLM2Rcvm0QkOKdiE3PpCY5YeR3... 15JanCh4_400-600.avi https://drive.google.com/file/d/1DavnBCyhq_JRmST2QH5qlojUE6dr5IWS/view?usp=sharing https://drive.google.com/file/d/1DavnBCyhq_JRmST2QH5qlojUE6d... https://mega.nz/#!faZggSja!yF_QOcodvYXwk7qEO1N8eSaV90ZWUUaS18Surn8rnEU https://mega.nz/#!faZggSja!yF_QOcodvYXwk7qEO1N8eSaV90ZWUUaS1... See pgs 18-23,8,11,12,35,45,61,62, and update list at end of doc.. Having trouble getting traction. Getting censored/banned. Billions in bribes paid to Trump, Pelosi, Schumer, Harris to enable a Soros funded child raping ring to operate in the USA. Please listen to the links below. Turn up the volume and put headphones on. You will hear these people, and many other high profile people, incriminate themselves in unbelievable fashion. Full 80 page document [update 20Aug] filled with red handed evidence like this at the bottom. Go to pages 18 through 36 of this document and you will hear Dorsey and Thiel raping children. You will hear their screams. They both rape and kill three. Also at the "rape party" of note: Bill DeBlasio, Andrew Cuomo, Bill Murray, Peter Buttgieg, George Soros, Barack Obama. Please copy and paste this post and repost it, or save it for later because it will likely get removed sooner or later. I keep getting censored by these people. Bill DeBlasio's turn starts at 2100 (page 35): https://mega.nz/#!OCJwQSBC!AlER6vRRTKS8yvSxnVwAl3ha3kGDLqoouQe53zkGARg https://mega.nz/#!OCJwQSBC!AlER6vRRTKS8yvSxnVwAl3ha3kGDLqoou... Andrew Cuomo's starts at 2200 (pages 35-36): https://mega.nz/#!qKZChABY!zy-2jIHqEg4gWHNbiEym-YBdSs5Y9qzT2ARieV_eozA https://mega.nz/#!qKZChABY!zy-2jIHqEg4gWHNbiEym-YBdSs5Y9qzT2... Both files in one here: 14JanCh3_2100-2300.avi https://drive.google.com/file/d/1yolCgVtY5b8d8YDcshwb-Yd3kS0Jg-Bk/view?usp=sharing https://drive.google.com/file/d/1yolCgVtY5b8d8YDcshwb-Yd3kS0... Peter Thiel starts at 100, Jack Dorsey at 130 each raping and killing three boys. Turn the volume all the way up and put head phones on. Pages 19-20. https://s3.wasabisys.com/conv1/Overnight_14-17Jan/15JanCh3_100-200.avi https://drive.google.com/file/d/1mzZrjobxhNIEf38M3xk-IeA5SeF4aUtB/view?usp=sharing https://mega.nz/#!qHhRiKLI!Tl1AnP0Lq6GIBH2MGitYNuXoe81uYeVQdxwSaZ8CY7o \0bama admits to raping and killing boys here at about 547, with commentary from Peter Thiel, George Soros, Matt Porter: https://s3.wasabisys.com/out2/Out2/15JanCh3_0545.avi https://drive.google.com/file/d/1LCDoc1kT7cfSeKQ1vniP_sx32_bRsHau/view?usp=sharing https://mega.nz/#!veBk1KrL!zkO_keTyZAtNoTGEGsfRmXyuVIj9p8c3R8GtY-o_Nt8 DTrump demands $4 billion to "take a blind eye" at 1015++ (link missing from report, unsure how). Here's pieces of dialogue: 1018 Henry Porter: The child raping. 1018 Donald Trump: What the fuck are you talking about? 1018 Gigi Hadid: Mr. President we are child rapists. 1018 Donald Trump: You cannot be serious. 1018 Donald Trump: You're gonna need $4 billion for me to take a blind eye. 1019 Porter: People are laughing because they think four billion is too much. I think it's not a problem when you have $35 billion. 1022 Donald Trump: You better have that $4 billion or you can kiss this shit goodbye. https://s3.wasabisys.com/conv2/3Jan/3JanCh3_900-1100.avi https://drive.google.com/file/d/1Grdr8xF2psKNsuYlEnl9dIRV-77YG0Vr/view?usp=sharing https://mega.nz/#!TKgxzS5J!i-nWn3HaOAJPU7rju83B4qcwSzun4Dl2B29FEZxtMSU Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi agreeing to $3 billion for safe passage at "Monterrey" (page 11): 1033 Nancy Pelosi: We want to make sure you have safe passage at Monterrey. 1033 Matthew Porter: We appreciate that Speaker Pelosi. 1033 Gigi Hadid: I think we may have to scale back a little bit though. 1033 Nancy Pelosi: Gigi I think we'll be just fine. ... 1035 Nancy Pelosi: God damn it! I want Kamala to get a billion out of yours, not out of mine. 1035 Gigi Hadid: I think we can accommodate you but we need to find out if Monterrey will be open on the 30th of January. 1036 Nancy Pelosi: Of course it will Gigi. 1036 Nancy Pelosi: $3 billion goes a long way Peter [Theil]. 17JanCh3_949-1100.avi https://drive.google.com/file/d/1eodHu4o5Cm3xEWhDqipSuTj-M1CZUvmE/view?usp=sharing https://drive.google.com/file/d/1eodHu4o5Cm3xEWhDqipSuTj-M1C... https://mega.nz/#!uXJUTYrI!-6eJXCWHSKhbHRv5p3df1a9k2-hHr9bxd5bkjxvgguY https://mega.nz/#!uXJUTYrI!-6eJXCWHSKhbHRv5p3df1a9k2-hHr9bxd... Trump wants $138 million to ensure smooth outcome for false judgment, as in no trial or hearing, simlpy entering in a judgement into the system thus bypassing the fifth amendment right of due process: https://s3.wasabisys.com/conv1/10JanCh3/10JanCh3_951-1033.avi https://drive.google.com/file/d/1iSeGHDToFRoRdIht50Wii0i30mlw9INp/view?usp=sharing https://mega.nz/#!jSwzFYLY!RFQvL8KIyFZf1WfC6tGoPFgJ4aREeGE_pe3i2fwshy8 Obama explains the Illuminati with Jack Dorsey...At 230 a conversation is occurring on the embedded Porter camera system with Jack Dorsey, Peter Thiel, Barack Obama, Bill Murray, and the Porter's. Jack Dorsey provides a statement defining who their group is: "The Illuminati is an underground organization of child rapists and homosexuals." Matthew Porter: "We have to thin the herd, so Barack is going to explain a few things." At 232 Barack Obama says the following: "You people have to realize we are child rapists. The Illuminati are child rapists. As soon as you figure that out, you can decide what to do. Everybody is freaking out about what just happened [child raping event still going on]. This is who we are.": https://s3.wasabisys.com/conv1/Overnight_14-17Jan/15JanCh3_200-347.avi https://drive.google.com/file/d/1Ok1-9IvANULzKBOwADFgaiYCFi6yszfj/view?usp=sharing https://mega.nz/#!nbhTwALA!qmf_0Lq0jApSwxRj1KRS_Q7QYbg4aJc4JMU9rDjR_yo Full 80 page document [updated 20Aug]: three ways to get it: https://s3.wasabisys.com/aviewmefirst/FBI_FinalDraft_26Jul2019_BSchlenker.pdf https://drive.google.com/file/d/1Sj9EN_pHmicKS6rFQlmk67knMdJc9cGk/view?usp=sharing https://mega.nz/#!OKYwES6A!zPGcRSg5de1XALI3FtUH3FCNCuLUzQbZN0l5iNCQqmU \Please post this anywhere you can! Each google drive link is a backup to the wasabi link just in case one is "down". Getting blocked, censored, "downvoted" etc. These people are extremely wealthy and throw money to anyone who will help them cover up their child rapes & murders, corruption. Ironically, this is usually done through a receivership transfer, where you receive the funds after four or more day, and it can be pulled at the last second, whch is usually the case, after you've done them the "service". A word about the "f@\&&ot" usage: it was a necessary tool. It showed three things: they were not in control, if they were the usage would have be stopped. Everyone out there needed to see t%his. Two, it made it unpleasant for them to be in the headspace, which has obvious advantages. Three, it pointed out impersonators of BS because they would not call each other f@%%ot, thus helping to mitigate the spread of false information. Apologies for those unintentionally offended. On that notey,, I give you Barack Obama in a foursome with Peter Thiel, Jack Dorsey, and Matthew Porter. It is on page 12 of the document where you can download the video containing audio footage of the "event". Link for the doc is just above under "Full 80 page document".
simonblack 7y ago
Uber and Lyft are both in the "extractive" business. Uber and Lyft are a scam to drain both investors and drivers of money which is skimmed off and goes into the pockets of the CEOs, and other business managers. There is no true profit generated by either the company itself or by the drivers. All business is being permitted by using the investors' money to undercut taxi companies' prices by subsidising customers. Once the investors finally wise up, both Uber and Lyft will disappear like they never existed.

86 points by ausbah 7y ago

Maybe CA doing stuff like sending itself back into the dark ages of taxis will prompt tech to take up root in other states more. I can only hope.

zzzeek 7y ago
the problem is that in order for you to have your convenient uber/lyft car, people are forced into poverty and homelessness as these jobs do not pay enough. background on homeless Uber drivers: https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2017/jun/17/uber-drivers-homeless-assault-travis-kalanick https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2017/jun/17/uber-drivers...
- jimmaswell 7y ago
  If these labor laws prevent that, then these people allegedly being forced into poverty and homelessness by uber/lyft would just get traditional minimum wage jobs instead which are plentiful at the moment. CA is at its lowest unemployment rate right now. Yet people are still taking these jobs over more traditional ones. So apparently the problem exists in both cases and a more general solution is in order than trying to get rid of contracting-like jobs which other comments point out uber/lyft certainly are (work for competitors simultaneously, no set hours, etc).
  - zzzeek 7y ago
    > would just get traditional minimum wage jobs instead which are plentiful at the moment. in which case they would not be Uber/lyft drivers and you would not have the convenience of these services available to you, back into the "dark ages of taxis" . > Yet people are still taking these jobs over more traditional ones. yes, and they are living below the poverty level by doing so. The fact remains that your experience of convenient uber/lyft rides depends upon people who willingly or not place themselves into poverty-level wages. For the moment, your convenience requires that people suffer in poverty. OTOH, if regulations were imposed such that Uber/Lyft had to raise their prices, then you can have the convenience of these services, at a higher cost (more likely though, it would be simply be a regular low-margin business like taxis and supermarkets and no longer profitable to investors), and it would not require poverty-level workers in order to achieve it. This is the purpose of the minimum wage - so that the job market isn't crowded with jobs that do not provide a living wage.
    - jimmaswell 7y ago
      My point is gig jobs must not be the real problem here, so the solution to the general problem isn't tanking the gig economy. If uber and lyft were so bad then people would be taking those regulated jobs that are available instead. I wouldn't mind if uber/lyft prices went up some to pay the employees better but I don't see it as a moral evil to make side jobs available where you're not paid for time doing nothing because there's not a job yet. Re: healthcare it should just be single payer and not tied to employment.

kerng 7y ago

They aren't contractors, and they are not employees. That's why its called "gig economy".

bdcravens 7y ago

If they get classified as employees, does that mean the companies will have more control over how they do their job? I've caught multiple drivers bypassing toll roads (causing a much longer trip) even though Uber includes the toll fee in what they charge me.

justforyou 7y ago
Uber doesn't really care about your safety, the quality of the ride, or your drivers behavior unless any of these things cause significant PR disasters and result in a very large number of users leaving the platform. This wouldn't change if the drivers were classified as employees. Also, do you have any proof drivers are actually able to pocket those missed tolls? Seems like a win/win, drivers get higher fare due to time, and Uber pockets toll. Why should Uber care?
- SllX 7y ago
  The driver would have to be the one paying the toll, so any money collected for a toll road by Uber would have to go to the driver, otherwise it’s just an arbitrary fee Uber decided to collect, not really a charge for the toll.
SllX 7y ago
They do. You in the passenger seat have some control, you can make their lives pretty difficult on the trip, you can demand that they take the toll road since you’re paying for it anyway. Appeal to Uber for a credit on those trips. I don’t know the process for Uber, but on Lyft I had someone bypass me entirely, drive just far enough away to give “me” a ride and collect partial credit, then “drop me off”. Lyft credited me, changed my rating on the driver (I fat fingered the rating on my way to call another car, I only call Lyfts when I’m in a hurry, not when I have all the time in the world), and gave me a guarantee that I would never see that driver again. I hope they also took notes on the scam that driver was running, but I stopped caring once I got my money back. If Uber gives a damn about customer retention, which they should, they predicated their entire business model on being the biggest, only game in town, you should expect a similar result.

jackschultz 7y ago

There's constant arguments about this, whether a driver for Lyft / Uber, or a delivery driver of Grubhub, Doordash, UberEats, is either an employee or contractor. And yet, I haven't seen talk of the creation of a new type of worker, one for the gig economy. I get that there's a big difficulty in creating these laws, with politicians who don't know exactly what the solution is, but someone needs to start by saying look, these gig economy workers are neither "employees" or "contractors" with the current law definitions, so we're going to create a new definition of worker geared towards these cases which makes sure employees aren't being taken advantage of, but also makes it possible for these companies to continue.

djrogers 7y ago
That would require legislators who are independent of the interests on both sides of the problem - something we rarely see here.
- eternalban 7y ago
  That is the general condition. It is possible that e.g. FLSA was passed due to the political calculations of the capitalist class, but it did happen. Incidentally, the "Gig Economy" has all the necessary features to serve as the Corporate Neoliberal version of pseudo-Communist China's Social Credit System. Possibly that may serve as motivation to address GP's excellent point regarding a new class of workers and the necessity to craft new laws. [FLSA]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fair_Labor_Standards_Act_of_1938 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fair_Labor_Standards_Act_of_19...
b_tterc_p 7y ago
Well that’s probably not possible because each gig market is different. Healthcare is the biggest item but seems unlikely to budge. Payments for, say, a driver vs. a dog walker are going to vary significantly due to different scheduling expectations, different time values, etc. It’s not clear what is meant by making it possible for these companies to continue either, as most of these companies are not currently running a profitable business.
7y ago

dagnysdildo 7y ago

So close and yet so far. No business or corporation has an inherent right to exist, and if you can only turn a profit by shafting the people who work for you then you have no business in business.

test6554 7y ago
If someone performs a voluntary job without a gun to their heads, the assumption is that they are not being shafted. Or they are being shafted by life so hard that this represents less shafting that all their other options. Otherwise, if they had better options, why would they take the job?
- dagnysdildo 7y ago
  There's no such thing as a voluntary job when the "alternative" is poverty, homelessness, and slow death by starvation or preventable disease.
  - kortilla 7y ago
    So your proposal is to drive these corporations out of existence and push the people back into poverty?
    - dagnysdildo 7y ago
      Not all of them. Just the ones that shaft workers. If your business has nothing to hide it has nothing to fear.

sokoloff 7y ago

[California Assembly Bill 5] would suck Uber, Lyft, and other gig economy platforms out of their legal vacuum and into well-defined orbits of labor law. It would be doing so in a way that tracks with the reality of their businesses and a common-sense definition of what an “employee” is. I don't think that a common sense definition of what an "employee" is includes "show up to work whenever you want, take whatever breaks you want, knock off whenever you want, show up wherever you want, work for another company at the same instant you're working for us, get paid for jobs completed rather than hours worked, have a genuine prospect to show a profit or loss, use your own equipment" and likely several other key elements of the Uber/Lyft driver-company relationship. I agree they're not 100% independent either, but I tend to view them as more independent than employees.

blueboo 7y ago
They have process to discourage each of those so called key elements. To earn a living wage, drivers need to earn bonuses by driving at specific times, for at least a target number of rides per session. They’re not taking coding contracts ...
lisper 7y ago
No contractor is 100% independent. If I hire a plumber, they fix the pipes that I tell them to fix. They don't just do whatever they feel like doing. If you're 100% independent you're not a contractor, you're retired.
- yojo 7y ago
  This is not a good analogy. The plumber is free to set their own rates, an uber driver cannot. No one can unilaterally fire the plumber from 50% of the plumbing market. Uber or Lyft can ban a driver at any time for any reason. You probably didn’t order up your plumber through PlumbersRUs. If you did, they would almost certainly be an employee of that entity.
  - sokoloff 7y ago
    Tow truck drivers are not employees of AAA.

tyingq 7y ago

The official rules[1] are somewhat ambiguous, so this might be an interesting Court battle. The key bit is probably "A worker is an employee when the business has the right to direct and control the work performed by the worker, even if that right is not exercised." [1] https://www.irs.gov/newsroom/understanding-employee-vs-contractor-designation https://www.irs.gov/newsroom/understanding-employee-vs-contr...

sundaeofshock 7y ago
That’s the federal definition. The State of California is codifying it’s own rules to remove the ambiguity.
- tyingq 7y ago
  Is there some link to what the criteria is?
lisper 7y ago
This criterion is ridiculously out of touch with reality. I just hired some people to trim my trees. I told them exactly which trees to trim, in some cases, which specific limbs to cut off. That doesn't make the tree-trimmers my employees.
- pwagland 7y ago
  The difference is that you are not "hiring" the tree trimmer 5 days a week, 52 weeks of the year. They have many "employers", and so are independent of all of them. An Uber/Lyft driver does not have many "employers", they only have 1/2, plus maybe their own other job.
  - lisper 7y ago
    > The difference is that you are not "hiring" the tree trimmer 5 days a week, 52 weeks of the year. Sure. But that's not what the text says. And BTW, the amount of time that an Uber/Lyft driver works is entirely up to them. They can work one day, take a month off, and then come back and work another day. Any Uber/Lyft driver who works 5 days a week, 52 weeks a year, is doing so because they choose to, not because they fear being fired if they don't.

nemothekid 7y ago

>To classify someone as an independent contractor, the court said, businesses must show that the worker is free from the control and direction of the employer; performs work that is outside the hirer’s core business; and customarily engages in “an independently established trade, occupation or business.” This is a bit unrelated, but how would this affect software contractors?

bdcravens 7y ago
It will impact fewer software contractors than we'd think: many contractors really aren't. You're a W2 employee of the placing agency, and they are sending you, their employee, to their client.
pwagland 7y ago
Interesting analogy. At least in the Netherlands, unless you have 3 or 4 contracts in a year, you are not really considered a contractor anyway, you are considered an employee. If you stay contracting more than 50% at a company for more than 2 years, you are not a consultant, you are just an expensive employee. I know that in Australia 20 years ago, there was a big push to make everyone contractors, to get rid of employee obligations, the rules were changed to be similar to NL now, but I don't know what has happened in the meantime.

halamadrid 7y ago

If you sign the petition be wary of this: I agree that Uber or its representatives may contact me by email, phone, or SMS at the email address or number I provide, including for marketing purposes.

paulsutter 7y ago

While it’s true that it’s bad for Uber it drivers are classified as employees, it’s also going to be bad for drivers. Why so much energy directed at punitive measures? Employee classification only benefits tax authorities who get to collect more money. Why we penalize hiring employees I have no idea but that’s how it works.

Barrin92 7y ago
> it’s also going to be bad for drivers how does this follow? Regular employees are entitled to minimum wage, overtime pay and reimbursements for work expenses. The latter in particular would finally put an end to Uber's business model of outsourcing maintenance and risk to drivers, costs which many drivers are very likely not fully aware of. Being treated as a regular employee, possible unionizing and being entitled to full benefits is a huge boon for working people.
- paulsutter 7y ago
  Reclassification doesn’t create new money. Things that would actually help drivers: - Limit Uber's share of the fare to 10%. Or 5%. And the driver gets the rest - Let drivers set strict limits on where they are willing to pick up/drop off, etc - Let drivers set their price/terms Give drivers more control, not less. Making them employees gives them less control
  - Barrin92 7y ago
    a ridesharing service without drivers doesn't exist. Of course reclassification doesn't create new money, if the companies want to be able to operate they'll need to find it somewhere else. Maybe we could start with not making developers millionaires in their 20s and hiring 1k+ sales people for a company that makes a smartphone app. Literal price fixing might seem simple but seems like a bad market intervention in comparison to giving workers reasonable negotiating power and representation.
    - paulsutter 7y ago

einpoklum 7y ago

Uber and Lyft are gaming labor laws in order to get a cheap flexible workforce. To the extent that their business depends on doing so, then, yes, they don't have a right to exist. I wish drivers could organize and set up ride-hailing collectives, so that we would just cut out Uber and Lyft as the middle-men; prices might be higher because of wages, but it won't all feel like an anti-social scam - and drivers will be able to participate in managing their own lives and put in their professional input (together with consumer groups / regulators) into standard of conduct, service and safety.

stevenjgarner 7y ago

This would be a powerful promoter of autonomous vehicle technologies in ridehail companies. Interesting that if passed, Assembly Bill 5 would become law at about the time the Tesla Network might be implemented. Might actually have a very positive effect on Uber, Lyft et al, just not on their drivers.

Kapura 7y ago

I think this bill passing would be a good thing, because gig workers need legal protections, and in America most people are also dependent on their employer to help cover the cost of health insurance (another issue itself; healthcare should be free). I know people who are regular uber drivers in LA, and they certainly treat driving for uber like a "real" job. They try to work regular hours; they need to to be able to make rent. I believe the real issue is the distinct lack of investment in public transit infrastructure in the US. Uber and Lyft claim they're providing a valuable service. In developed nations cities build subways and bus routes to meet the needs of residents. America's philosophy seems to be to never provide a necessary service for free when somebody could be making a buck off it.

carapace 7y ago

I tend to bring this up on Uber/Lyft/etc threads, but it seems especially relevant here: "The Market Fairy Will Not Solve the Problems of Uber and Lyft" (2016) https://www.ianwelsh.net/the-market-fairy-will-not-solve-the-problems-of-uber-and-lyft/ https://www.ianwelsh.net/the-market-fairy-will-not-solve-the... > Here is the thing about Uber and Lyft (and much of the “sharing economy”). > They don’t pay the cost of their capital. > The wages they pay to their drivers are less than the depreciation of the cars and the expense of keeping the drivers fed, housed, and healthy. They pay less than minimum wage in most markets, and, in most markets, that is not enough to pay the costs of a car plus a human. > These business models are ways of draining capital from the economy and putting them into the hands of a few investors and executives. ... From the drivers' POV these companies are parasites.

b_tterc_p 7y ago

I think the part about financial incentives to work longer shifts is a low hanging fruit. This should not be allowed. It basically forces an employee like relationship for an individual to make a practical living (if even). If this were not allowed, uber would be forced to pay higher wages across the board.

test6554 7y ago
That's my one complaint. Penalizing drivers for rejecting rides. If you could truly be living your life and set multiple rideshare apps to notify you only when ride fares exceed X rate, then everyone would just set their minimum rate on all the apps and just take the most profitable fares that came their way.

matz1 7y ago

everyone should be a contractor anyway. Health care should be decoupled from employer.

dehrmann 7y ago
In theory, I'm ok with this, but we also need a stronger social safety net. There's still a certain amount of social responsibility that comes with employing someone full-time, even though it's not required by law. As long as the government can step in to fill the gap, this can work. What's tricky is that while there are benefits to business because now their business is business, not retaining workers longer than they should, it makes them cold and heartless. But we're humans, we don't respond will to that, and we want to be treated with dignity, even in business transactions.

beeschlenker 7y ago

...And neither do these guys... Soros child rape ring protected by Trump for $4 billion bribe, Pelosi $3b to "ensure safe passage over border". Rapists include Obama, Schumer, Cuomo, Buttgieg, DeBlasio, Theil, Dorsey, Bill Murray. Over 60 deaths from rapes in Buffalo Jan\'19, billions in payoffs. Listen to them do it here: Listen! to previously unprocessed footage now available [Soros, 0bama child rapes 15Jan 4-6am], Obama around 524: "Why is there so much blood? Someone get me something to clean the blood off my dick..." footage gets censored in LA, NYC, CHI, SF, BOS, DC...why are these wealthy high profile child rapists, who are caught in the act with no action by the FBI? *note: -> groups of links are multiple ways to get the same file -> 15JanCh3_347-528.avi https://drive.google.com/file/d/1Q8YeDzghf95FQrxBaMpXK4b-SfJYERs8/view?usp=sharing https://drive.google.com/file/d/1Q8YeDzghf95FQrxBaMpXK4b-SfJ... https://mega.nz/#!bTQwDQDA!jolSOqGR2Zomhtn7zIG0lGmqXSqe3KG1mO_7nKLrqNo https://mega.nz/#!bTQwDQDA!jolSOqGR2Zomhtn7zIG0lGmqXSqe3KG1m... 15JanCh3_528-545.avi https://drive.google.com/file/d/1DavyRFWTRv4_teHYewpQMwMCq6LDzb6Y/view?usp=sharing https://drive.google.com/file/d/1DavyRFWTRv4_teHYewpQMwMCq6L... https://mega.nz/#!DfBywKKR!llMUzB8DLM2Rcvm0QkOKdiE3PpCY5YeR3yJwrm9R_4U https://mega.nz/#!DfBywKKR!llMUzB8DLM2Rcvm0QkOKdiE3PpCY5YeR3... 15JanCh4_400-600.avi https://drive.google.com/file/d/1DavnBCyhq_JRmST2QH5qlojUE6dr5IWS/view?usp=sharing https://drive.google.com/file/d/1DavnBCyhq_JRmST2QH5qlojUE6d... https://mega.nz/#!faZggSja!yF_QOcodvYXwk7qEO1N8eSaV90ZWUUaS18Surn8rnEU https://mega.nz/#!faZggSja!yF_QOcodvYXwk7qEO1N8eSaV90ZWUUaS1... See pgs 18-23,8,11,12,35,45,61,62, and update list at end of doc.. Having trouble getting traction. Getting censored/banned. Billions in bribes paid to Trump, Pelosi, Schumer, Harris to enable a Soros funded child raping ring to operate in the USA. Please listen to the links below. Turn up the volume and put headphones on. You will hear these people, and many other high profile people, incriminate themselves in unbelievable fashion. Full 80 page document [update 20Aug] filled with red handed evidence like this at the bottom. Go to pages 18 through 36 of this document and you will hear Dorsey and Thiel raping children. You will hear their screams. They both rape and kill three. Also at the "rape party" of note: Bill DeBlasio, Andrew Cuomo, Bill Murray, Peter Buttgieg, George Soros, Barack Obama. Please copy and paste this post and repost it, or save it for later because it will likely get removed sooner or later. I keep getting censored by these people. Bill DeBlasio's turn starts at 2100 (page 35): https://mega.nz/#!OCJwQSBC!AlER6vRRTKS8yvSxnVwAl3ha3kGDLqoouQe53zkGARg https://mega.nz/#!OCJwQSBC!AlER6vRRTKS8yvSxnVwAl3ha3kGDLqoou... Andrew Cuomo's starts at 2200 (pages 35-36): https://mega.nz/#!qKZChABY!zy-2jIHqEg4gWHNbiEym-YBdSs5Y9qzT2ARieV_eozA https://mega.nz/#!qKZChABY!zy-2jIHqEg4gWHNbiEym-YBdSs5Y9qzT2... Both files in one here: 14JanCh3_2100-2300.avi https://drive.google.com/file/d/1yolCgVtY5b8d8YDcshwb-Yd3kS0Jg-Bk/view?usp=sharing https://drive.google.com/file/d/1yolCgVtY5b8d8YDcshwb-Yd3kS0... Peter Thiel starts at 100, Jack Dorsey at 130 each raping and killing three boys. Turn the volume all the way up and put head phones on. Pages 19-20. https://s3.wasabisys.com/conv1/Overnight_14-17Jan/15JanCh3_100-200.avi https://drive.google.com/file/d/1mzZrjobxhNIEf38M3xk-IeA5SeF4aUtB/view?usp=sharing https://mega.nz/#!qHhRiKLI!Tl1AnP0Lq6GIBH2MGitYNuXoe81uYeVQdxwSaZ8CY7o \0bama admits to raping and killing boys here at about 547, with commentary from Peter Thiel, George Soros, Matt Porter: https://s3.wasabisys.com/out2/Out2/15JanCh3_0545.avi https://drive.google.com/file/d/1LCDoc1kT7cfSeKQ1vniP_sx32_bRsHau/view?usp=sharing https://mega.nz/#!veBk1KrL!zkO_keTyZAtNoTGEGsfRmXyuVIj9p8c3R8GtY-o_Nt8 DTrump demands $4 billion to "take a blind eye" at 1015++ (link missing from report, unsure how). Here's pieces of dialogue: 1018 Henry Porter: The child raping. 1018 Donald Trump: What the fuck are you talking about? 1018 Gigi Hadid: Mr. President we are child rapists. 1018 Donald Trump: You cannot be serious. 1018 Donald Trump: You're gonna need $4 billion for me to take a blind eye. 1019 Porter: People are laughing because they think four billion is too much. I think it's not a problem when you have $35 billion. 1022 Donald Trump: You better have that $4 billion or you can kiss this shit goodbye. https://s3.wasabisys.com/conv2/3Jan/3JanCh3_900-1100.avi https://drive.google.com/file/d/1Grdr8xF2psKNsuYlEnl9dIRV-77YG0Vr/view?usp=sharing https://mega.nz/#!TKgxzS5J!i-nWn3HaOAJPU7rju83B4qcwSzun4Dl2B29FEZxtMSU Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi agreeing to $3 billion for safe passage at "Monterrey" (page 11): 1033 Nancy Pelosi: We want to make sure you have safe passage at Monterrey. 1033 Matthew Porter: We appreciate that Speaker Pelosi. 1033 Gigi Hadid: I think we may have to scale back a little bit though. 1033 Nancy Pelosi: Gigi I think we'll be just fine. ... 1035 Nancy Pelosi: God damn it! I want Kamala to get a billion out of yours, not out of mine. 1035 Gigi Hadid: I think we can accommodate you but we need to find out if Monterrey will be open on the 30th of January. 1036 Nancy Pelosi: Of course it will Gigi. 1036 Nancy Pelosi: $3 billion goes a long way Peter [Theil]. 17JanCh3_949-1100.avi https://drive.google.com/file/d/1eodHu4o5Cm3xEWhDqipSuTj-M1CZUvmE/view?usp=sharing https://drive.google.com/file/d/1eodHu4o5Cm3xEWhDqipSuTj-M1C... https://mega.nz/#!uXJUTYrI!-6eJXCWHSKhbHRv5p3df1a9k2-hHr9bxd5bkjxvgguY https://mega.nz/#!uXJUTYrI!-6eJXCWHSKhbHRv5p3df1a9k2-hHr9bxd... Trump wants $138 million to ensure smooth outcome for false judgment, as in no trial or hearing, simlpy entering in a judgement into the system thus bypassing the fifth amendment right of due process: https://s3.wasabisys.com/conv1/10JanCh3/10JanCh3_951-1033.avi https://drive.google.com/file/d/1iSeGHDToFRoRdIht50Wii0i30mlw9INp/view?usp=sharing https://mega.nz/#!jSwzFYLY!RFQvL8KIyFZf1WfC6tGoPFgJ4aREeGE_pe3i2fwshy8 Obama explains the Illuminati with Jack Dorsey...At 230 a conversation is occurring on the embedded Porter camera system with Jack Dorsey, Peter Thiel, Barack Obama, Bill Murray, and the Porter's. Jack Dorsey provides a statement defining who their group is: "The Illuminati is an underground organization of child rapists and homosexuals." Matthew Porter: "We have to thin the herd, so Barack is going to explain a few things." At 232 Barack Obama says the following: "You people have to realize we are child rapists. The Illuminati are child rapists. As soon as you figure that out, you can decide what to do. Everybody is freaking out about what just happened [child raping event still going on]. This is who we are.": https://s3.wasabisys.com/conv1/Overnight_14-17Jan/15JanCh3_200-347.avi https://drive.google.com/file/d/1Ok1-9IvANULzKBOwADFgaiYCFi6yszfj/view?usp=sharing https://mega.nz/#!nbhTwALA!qmf_0Lq0jApSwxRj1KRS_Q7QYbg4aJc4JMU9rDjR_yo Full 80 page document [updated 20Aug]: three ways to get it: https://s3.wasabisys.com/aviewmefirst/FBI_FinalDraft_26Jul2019_BSchlenker.pdf https://drive.google.com/file/d/1Sj9EN_pHmicKS6rFQlmk67knMdJc9cGk/view?usp=sharing https://mega.nz/#!OKYwES6A!zPGcRSg5de1XALI3FtUH3FCNCuLUzQbZN0l5iNCQqmU \Please post this anywhere you can! Each google drive link is a backup to the wasabi link just in case one is "down". Getting blocked, censored, "downvoted" etc. These people are extremely wealthy and throw money to anyone who will help them cover up their child rapes & murders, corruption. Ironically, this is usually done through a receivership transfer, where you receive the funds after four or more day, and it can be pulled at the last second, whch is usually the case, after you've done them the "service". A word about the "f@\&&ot" usage: it was a necessary tool. It showed three things: they were not in control, if they were the usage would have be stopped. Everyone out there needed to see t%his. Two, it made it unpleasant for them to be in the headspace, which has obvious advantages. Three, it pointed out impersonators of BS because they would not call each other f@%%ot, thus helping to mitigate the spread of false information. Apologies for those unintentionally offended. On that notey,, I give you Barack Obama in a foursome with Peter Thiel, Jack Dorsey, and Matthew Porter. It is on page 12 of the document where you can download the video containing audio footage of the "event". Link for the doc is just above under "Full 80 page document".

simonblack 7y ago

Uber and Lyft are both in the "extractive" business. Uber and Lyft are a scam to drain both investors and drivers of money which is skimmed off and goes into the pockets of the CEOs, and other business managers. There is no true profit generated by either the company itself or by the drivers. All business is being permitted by using the investors' money to undercut taxi companies' prices by subsidising customers. Once the investors finally wise up, both Uber and Lyft will disappear like they never existed.