5 ms·

By the author's logic, public transportation also enables binge drinking. I think they just dont like driving drunk rich people as their source of income so the

by zwkrt 5y ago

By the author's logic, public transportation also enables binge drinking. I think they just dont like driving drunk rich people as their source of income so they wrote a diary entry about it.

bayesian_horse 5y ago
You missed the hint about the domestic violence?
- Decker87 5y ago
  So they don't like that either?
- newbie789 5y ago
- kortilla 5y ago
  Yes, the made up one. Do you think someone who spends $100 to get wasted at a bar and another $30 to get home is less likely to commit domestic violence than someone who can down a whole fifth of whiskey at home with no bartender supervision for $20? Lyft and Uber do not enable binge drinking, they enable social binge drinking. The violent drunks I knew of growing up were plenty content on getting hammered at home and becoming violent. Most would become violent well after they would have been cutoff by a bartender.
  - actionfromafar 5y ago
    I don't see any evidence your statement isn't made up either.
    - kortilla 5y ago
      Well it’s pretty common knowledge that bartenders cutoff drunks and that alcohol is cheaper to consume in the home. Which of those would you like to dig into first?
      - actionfromafar 5y ago
        None of those, but the implicit assumption that the pool of violent drunks won't increase when the bar (pun intended) for binge drinking in any setting is lowered.
  - kjkjadksj 5y ago
    All lyft and uber have done in terms of social drinking was give you an option to pay for a dd rather than have one of your friends on the role. This is probably still true today but bars can call taxis for you.
  - bayesian_horse 5y ago
    For me the point wasn't that much about enabling more domestic violence, but about being "in the loop" of that particular incident. Also, yes, it is worse when the person is drinking out of the home, because that means family members have a lot less control over the drinking and less warning. And domestic violence really doesn't have a high requirement of blood alcohol level. Even very minor levels can disinhibit a person, especially if he is already habituated to act out on his family members.
bayindirh 5y ago
And he backed his claims by some survey numbers, no?
- Hendrikto 5y ago
  He listed some survey numbers. They don’t back his claims though. Classic correlation vs causation.
  - bayindirh 5y ago
    I don't agree. Convenience is a nice and valid reason to consume more and/or remove prohibitions. When something is cheap, it's consumed more. When it's free of consequences, consuming more is easier. Like how iPhone created a spike in data usage, being not subject to DUI or reducing chances of immediate death is a nice excuse to remove prohibitions and consume more alcohol.
    - belorn 5y ago
      Sweden follow that path of logic by imposing over 100% taxes on alcohol in order to discourage consumption. When a cup of beer costs around $10 it quickly becomes very expensive to get drunk. The state also has a monopoly on sales outside of bars, and the store closes fairly early on Fridays, is only open during a short period on Saturdays, and fully closed on Sundays. All with the primary goal of limiting consumption by making the purchasing less spontaneous and less convenient. There is however some debate if consumption is really reduced by making it expensive and inconvenient, and if it is simply a tax on poor people who are at work during weekdays.
    - Hendrikto 5y ago
      So you just speculate without evidence. I can also speculate: Population centers have a higher density of bars and taxis. Simply because there is a larger client base. Without evidence, you cannot tell.
sjf 5y ago
Yeah, I don't get the point of this article, seems like venting mostly. They obviously resent being a 'designated driver on demand' but this is basically what an Uber driver is. It is also completely their choice to drive at the time when people are leaving bars.
- deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]
- hackernewshell 5y ago
  Plus--I think he took creative license on the conversations. "Hold her down, and I'll keep her mouth busy". And of course they ask him why he isn't laughing. It just sounds made up for article dramitism. Do people drink more because of cheap ride share--yes. The problem is ride share is not cheap anymore.
- SkinTaco 5y ago
  > It is also completely their choice to drive at the time when people are leaving bars. I browse a lot of driver subreddits (r/uberdrivers, r/doordash, r/doordash_drivers, etc) and it's surprisingly common to see people complain about things like this. Imo this is extra weird when you consider this is a major selling point of these apps - "You can work your own schedule and you won't have a boss to worry about" is part of the allure and is often even how the apps are advertised. I would be interested to know why this is such a common theme but people don't usually comment on the why on reddit
- GekkePrutser 5y ago
  I can imagine you get a bit fed up with it after some guy pukes in your cab every night though. But he didn't mention this in the article at all so apparently that's not his complaint. What he does complain about is indeed what a taxi service is for. I wouldn't call Uber a "rideshare" anymore, this is how it started but all Uber drivers are pros now. It's just a "taxi license (and worker rights) avoiding taxi service" now :P The idea of ridesharing was that you'd take a trip to place X and people could chip in and join you for the trip. But literally nobody uses Uber for that anymore.
mvc 5y ago
If they needed the barman's help to hail an Uber, I don't fancy their chances of getting home on public transport.
rwl 5y ago
Public transportation does enable drinking. That is one reason why young people move to, and like to live in, cities with public transportation. But there are still huge, important differences between public transport and "ride sharing". Public transportation almost never takes you point to point. You are expected to navigate public transportation on your own, including getting in and out at the right stops. Public transportation usually has sharply reduced service several hours before bars close. You also need a ticket, which often means you must be sober enough to work a machine that only takes cash. If public transport is your ride home, you need to be a lot more sober than the people the author is writing about. There are important differences compared to taxis, too. To take a taxi, you must (often) be prepared to pay in cash. You must have enough verbal control to give your address. It is not implausible that ride sharing apps enable a kind of binge drinking that is qualitatively different from the kind people do when they have to take another way home.
- fy20 5y ago
  > If public transport is your ride home, you need to be a lot more sober than the people the author is writing about Having lived in London when I was younger I beg to differ. I only ended up at the last stop and having to walk home a couple of miles a few times. One time I managed to cycle from Leicester Square to Chelsea - I don't know why, I didn't live anywhere near Chelsea.
  - tomcam 5y ago
    Gemma was why. Or Fiona? Fiona.
  - LilBytes 5y ago
    Yeah before ride sharing in the UK and later Australia, I got the train home, fell asleep, woke up in the middle of nowhere as the sun crept into view at least half a dozen times. Ride sharing certainly increased my chances of getting home successfully, though my anecdotal experience is it wouldn't have had an impact on levity or intoxication.
  - FpUser 5y ago
    I was in London on some software related business. So those brits invited me for a lunch at about 11AM. All came down to some place (my first time in London ever) and ordered pints. Talked a bit. Finished first pint then ordered another. After 5th pint I asked how about a lunch. This is a focken lunch was the answer. Loved those brits.

by zwkrt 5y ago

By the author's logic, public transportation also enables binge drinking. I think they just dont like driving drunk rich people as their source of income so they wrote a diary entry about it.

bayesian_horse 5y ago

You missed the hint about the domestic violence?

Decker87 5y ago
So they don't like that either?
newbie789 5y ago
kortilla 5y ago
Yes, the made up one. Do you think someone who spends $100 to get wasted at a bar and another $30 to get home is less likely to commit domestic violence than someone who can down a whole fifth of whiskey at home with no bartender supervision for $20? Lyft and Uber do not enable binge drinking, they enable social binge drinking. The violent drunks I knew of growing up were plenty content on getting hammered at home and becoming violent. Most would become violent well after they would have been cutoff by a bartender.
- actionfromafar 5y ago
  I don't see any evidence your statement isn't made up either.
  - kortilla 5y ago
    Well it’s pretty common knowledge that bartenders cutoff drunks and that alcohol is cheaper to consume in the home. Which of those would you like to dig into first?
    - actionfromafar 5y ago
      None of those, but the implicit assumption that the pool of violent drunks won't increase when the bar (pun intended) for binge drinking in any setting is lowered.
- kjkjadksj 5y ago
  All lyft and uber have done in terms of social drinking was give you an option to pay for a dd rather than have one of your friends on the role. This is probably still true today but bars can call taxis for you.
- bayesian_horse 5y ago
  For me the point wasn't that much about enabling more domestic violence, but about being "in the loop" of that particular incident. Also, yes, it is worse when the person is drinking out of the home, because that means family members have a lot less control over the drinking and less warning. And domestic violence really doesn't have a high requirement of blood alcohol level. Even very minor levels can disinhibit a person, especially if he is already habituated to act out on his family members.

bayindirh 5y ago

And he backed his claims by some survey numbers, no?

Hendrikto 5y ago
He listed some survey numbers. They don’t back his claims though. Classic correlation vs causation.
- bayindirh 5y ago
  I don't agree. Convenience is a nice and valid reason to consume more and/or remove prohibitions. When something is cheap, it's consumed more. When it's free of consequences, consuming more is easier. Like how iPhone created a spike in data usage, being not subject to DUI or reducing chances of immediate death is a nice excuse to remove prohibitions and consume more alcohol.
  - belorn 5y ago
    Sweden follow that path of logic by imposing over 100% taxes on alcohol in order to discourage consumption. When a cup of beer costs around $10 it quickly becomes very expensive to get drunk. The state also has a monopoly on sales outside of bars, and the store closes fairly early on Fridays, is only open during a short period on Saturdays, and fully closed on Sundays. All with the primary goal of limiting consumption by making the purchasing less spontaneous and less convenient. There is however some debate if consumption is really reduced by making it expensive and inconvenient, and if it is simply a tax on poor people who are at work during weekdays.
  - Hendrikto 5y ago
    So you just speculate without evidence. I can also speculate: Population centers have a higher density of bars and taxis. Simply because there is a larger client base. Without evidence, you cannot tell.

sjf 5y ago

Yeah, I don't get the point of this article, seems like venting mostly. They obviously resent being a 'designated driver on demand' but this is basically what an Uber driver is. It is also completely their choice to drive at the time when people are leaving bars.

deleted 5y ago
[deleted]
hackernewshell 5y ago
Plus--I think he took creative license on the conversations. "Hold her down, and I'll keep her mouth busy". And of course they ask him why he isn't laughing. It just sounds made up for article dramitism. Do people drink more because of cheap ride share--yes. The problem is ride share is not cheap anymore.
SkinTaco 5y ago
> It is also completely their choice to drive at the time when people are leaving bars. I browse a lot of driver subreddits (r/uberdrivers, r/doordash, r/doordash_drivers, etc) and it's surprisingly common to see people complain about things like this. Imo this is extra weird when you consider this is a major selling point of these apps - "You can work your own schedule and you won't have a boss to worry about" is part of the allure and is often even how the apps are advertised. I would be interested to know why this is such a common theme but people don't usually comment on the why on reddit
GekkePrutser 5y ago
I can imagine you get a bit fed up with it after some guy pukes in your cab every night though. But he didn't mention this in the article at all so apparently that's not his complaint. What he does complain about is indeed what a taxi service is for. I wouldn't call Uber a "rideshare" anymore, this is how it started but all Uber drivers are pros now. It's just a "taxi license (and worker rights) avoiding taxi service" now :P The idea of ridesharing was that you'd take a trip to place X and people could chip in and join you for the trip. But literally nobody uses Uber for that anymore.

mvc 5y ago

If they needed the barman's help to hail an Uber, I don't fancy their chances of getting home on public transport.

rwl 5y ago

Public transportation does enable drinking. That is one reason why young people move to, and like to live in, cities with public transportation. But there are still huge, important differences between public transport and "ride sharing". Public transportation almost never takes you point to point. You are expected to navigate public transportation on your own, including getting in and out at the right stops. Public transportation usually has sharply reduced service several hours before bars close. You also need a ticket, which often means you must be sober enough to work a machine that only takes cash. If public transport is your ride home, you need to be a lot more sober than the people the author is writing about. There are important differences compared to taxis, too. To take a taxi, you must (often) be prepared to pay in cash. You must have enough verbal control to give your address. It is not implausible that ride sharing apps enable a kind of binge drinking that is qualitatively different from the kind people do when they have to take another way home.

fy20 5y ago
> If public transport is your ride home, you need to be a lot more sober than the people the author is writing about Having lived in London when I was younger I beg to differ. I only ended up at the last stop and having to walk home a couple of miles a few times. One time I managed to cycle from Leicester Square to Chelsea - I don't know why, I didn't live anywhere near Chelsea.
- tomcam 5y ago
  Gemma was why. Or Fiona? Fiona.
- LilBytes 5y ago
  Yeah before ride sharing in the UK and later Australia, I got the train home, fell asleep, woke up in the middle of nowhere as the sun crept into view at least half a dozen times. Ride sharing certainly increased my chances of getting home successfully, though my anecdotal experience is it wouldn't have had an impact on levity or intoxication.
- FpUser 5y ago
  I was in London on some software related business. So those brits invited me for a lunch at about 11AM. All came down to some place (my first time in London ever) and ordered pints. Talked a bit. Finished first pint then ordered another. After 5th pint I asked how about a lunch. This is a focken lunch was the answer. Loved those brits.