3 ms·

Are you suggesting disabled people receive a regular fixed sum from the government, or that they'd have to individually apply each trip for the compensation? Bo

Are you suggesting disabled people receive a regular fixed sum from the government, or that they'd have to individually apply each trip for the compensation? Both seem problematic/inefficient to me, compared to having Uber being able to, for instance, reduce/offset their reportable taxable income to compensate for the cost of providing services to disabled customers.

FrenchDevRemote 4y ago
>Are you suggesting disabled people receive a regular fixed sum from the government, or that they'd have to individually apply each trip for the compensation? In France you get both. A fixed sum for your handicap+a bit more money if you have rent to pay, which amount to +/- minimum wage(which is very livable in most cities besides Paris) And you get free cabs/transportation, my neighbor's kid get a cab every day of the week without having to pay a cent, same for a lot of kids in special ed, cancer patients, any serious disease even temporary mean you can get free cabs.
Spivak 4y ago
No, rides should be the same cost at point of sale (i.e. rider pays the same rate whether they're disabled or not) and then Uber/Taxi company bills the gov't for compensation for each trip.
- wizofaus 4y ago
  Sounds equivalent to my suggestion (except it works for better for companies currently paying no corporate tax). Just waiting for someone to come along and argue we shouldn't be providing incentives for people to become disabled...
Aerroon 4y ago
>Both seem problematic/inefficient to me, compared to having Uber being able to, for instance, reduce/offset their reportable taxable income to compensate for the cost of providing services to disabled customers. And this is why the US tax code is a mile long with loopholes upon loopholes. It seems far more inefficient to me to get companies to play creative accounting than to give individuals some sum of money.
- wizofaus 4y ago
  Possibly, but there are surely fewer companies eligible for making such a claim than there are individuals. Depends how automated you can make it I guess. And while I'm not one to get overly upset if certain compensation schemes are slightly vulnerable to fraud, you still need to maintain public trust in such a system for it to have long term viability, and individual- based schemes are surely more expensive to police/regulate.

FrenchDevRemote 4y ago

>Are you suggesting disabled people receive a regular fixed sum from the government, or that they'd have to individually apply each trip for the compensation? In France you get both. A fixed sum for your handicap+a bit more money if you have rent to pay, which amount to +/- minimum wage(which is very livable in most cities besides Paris) And you get free cabs/transportation, my neighbor's kid get a cab every day of the week without having to pay a cent, same for a lot of kids in special ed, cancer patients, any serious disease even temporary mean you can get free cabs.

Spivak 4y ago

No, rides should be the same cost at point of sale (i.e. rider pays the same rate whether they're disabled or not) and then Uber/Taxi company bills the gov't for compensation for each trip.

wizofaus 4y ago
Sounds equivalent to my suggestion (except it works for better for companies currently paying no corporate tax). Just waiting for someone to come along and argue we shouldn't be providing incentives for people to become disabled...

Aerroon 4y ago

>Both seem problematic/inefficient to me, compared to having Uber being able to, for instance, reduce/offset their reportable taxable income to compensate for the cost of providing services to disabled customers. And this is why the US tax code is a mile long with loopholes upon loopholes. It seems far more inefficient to me to get companies to play creative accounting than to give individuals some sum of money.

wizofaus 4y ago
Possibly, but there are surely fewer companies eligible for making such a claim than there are individuals. Depends how automated you can make it I guess. And while I'm not one to get overly upset if certain compensation schemes are slightly vulnerable to fraud, you still need to maintain public trust in such a system for it to have long term viability, and individual- based schemes are surely more expensive to police/regulate.