4 ms·
I think Carr is very uncomfortable with where services like Uber are taking us. Specifically the notion that we're headed for a world with a much starker rich/p
by 46Bit 14y ago
I think Carr is very uncomfortable with where services like Uber are taking us. Specifically the notion that we're headed for a world with a much starker rich/poor divide, due to power becoming more concentrated in the hands of companies like Uber whilst the drivers just do what they're told.
He's not necessarily wrong in my view, yet I'm unsure what he's trying to do but bitch about it. It's a problem, yet at the same time it's something of an opportunity to do amazing things when governments no longer have the will or apparent wealth.
- pbiggar 14y agoI would like to hear more about this rich/poor divide and how Uber takes us there?
- 46Bit 14y agoHe goes overboard by the end, but: http://pandodaily.com/2012/10/24/travis-shrugged/ http://pandodaily.com/2012/10/24/travis-shrugged/
- pbiggar 14y agoI read that, overboard is quite the understatement. To spare me rereading the whole thing, are there specific parts that point to a rich/poor divide?
- mattmanser 14y agoNo, it makes entirely different arguments.
- frankus 14y agoI don't entirely agree with the reasoning, but I think it goes like this: Historically transportation in NYC has been pretty egalitarian (leaving aside car service). A 1-percenter pays the same cab fare, subway fare, or (heaven forfend) bus fare as a single mom on welfare, and presumably gets basically the same level of service. The president drinks the same Coke you and I do. Uber basically allows those with more money to jump the queue. You hear the same thing about medical services in single-payer or socialized systems, where it's seen as almost a form of bribery for a medical professional to expedite care for someone who pays extra. Unfortunately while markets are arguably fair for groups of people with the roughly the same level of resources at their disposal (people are just expressing their preferences by allocating their money differently), they can be very "unfair" (for a certain narrow meaning of the word) because some people have vastly more resources to trade for a limited good. It almost makes you wish you could somehow separate "spendable money" from "earnable money", but unfortunately you need a way to incentivize people to work and be productive, and giving them more spending money seems to be the most straightforward way of doing so.
- pbiggar 14y agoRight. I guess the flaw in the argument is that the poor already cannot afford taxis, and they take the bus.