4 ms·
> Posted it in an other thread [0] but do we really want to go back to the medallion system? No, but that doesn't preclude us from stopping Uber and Lyft. We c
by thewebcount 6y ago
> Posted it in an other thread [0] but do we really want to go back to the medallion system?
No, but that doesn't preclude us from stopping Uber and Lyft. We can have a different system where there are no medallions, the number of cars aren't artificially constrained, but the companies running them need to obey existing laws.
- Dylan16807 6y ago> the companies running them need to obey existing laws Well let's not act like "existing laws" are the most important factor. The laws were changed here, after all! I'd like to see a system where drivers have a lot of control over when they work, and can be in both apps at once, but also have healthcare and the ability to access unemployment insurance. Even though as far as I'm aware it's not feasible under existing law.
- eschaton 6y agoThey weren’t, though! Uber and Lyft are being told that they should have been classifying drivers as employees all along because they’re treating them like employees. This has been plainly obvious from day one.
- tick_tock_tick 6y agoThey were not legally required too; or at-least never lost a law suite to the degree that they were required too. Only once AB 5 pass did it really become a true legal requirement.
- tenuousemphasis 6y agoEmployees are told when to work. Uber and Lyft drivers choose their own hours.
- 908B64B197 6y agoIn most places, the existing laws are the medallions. Which laws? Do they exist now?
- bobthepanda 6y agoWell, TFA is about how Uber and Lyft are leaving California because AB5 makes them pay drivers minimum wage, so I would hope they are leaving California because of a real, existing threat.
- stale2002 6y ago> We can have a different system where there are no medallions, the number of cars aren't artificially constrained, but the companies running them need to obey existing laws. The only reason why the laws changed at all was because of Uber and Lyft. Nobody would have changed the system if they didn't come in.
- wtvanhest 6y agoIt could be interesting to artificially constrain the number of cars and auction the slots on a rolling 12 Month basis so that the tax payers get the full value of the licenses rather than speculators
- LegitShady 6y agowelcome to the medallion system
- aeternum 6y agoIt should not be just cabs, it should be all cars
- anticensor 6y agoBut make them non-transferable.
- kofejnik 6y ago> artificially constrain the number of cars Why? Also, if we're doing this, let's also artificially constrain something else, maybe the amount of meat produced, and auction the right to sell meat to few highest bidders? After all, meat production has a lot externalities like methane emissions, etc etc., so why not constrain it? Then, we must prevent exploitation of poor underpaid workers in Bangladesh, so let's restrict clothes supply, to reduce harmful externalities. Two pairs of basic jeans and 3 shirts should be enough for everyone, right?
- kofejnik 6y ago> that doesn't preclude us from stopping Uber and Lyft. I really really hope that you fail. Thanks to Uber, my wife can enjoy safe and reliable transportation. But some whiteknighting woke people cannot tolerate that, I guess they hate women? Oh wait, my wife is an evil capitalist who's exploiting poor User drivers, right? How ironic