4 ms·
Regardless of one's opinion, how can you have a serious discussion without mentioning the benefit users get from these products? That's what drives the whole th
by gruseom 13y ago
Regardless of one's opinion, how can you have a serious discussion without mentioning the benefit users get from these products? That's what drives the whole thing.
- pilom 13y ago>"the benefit users get from these products" By being exposed to risk by uninsured operators? The operators (drivers or hosts) undercut current offerings (taxis and hotels) by not being insured.
- gruseom 13y agoThe benefit is getting a car, or a place to stay, far more easily. My point isn't that these services are net good (though I do think so). It's that any "net bad" argument that doesn't consider these benefits isn't serious and so discredits its own side.
- pilom 13y agoI also agree that these services are a net good, but I think what the original article was trying to say was "why don't they just suck it up and insure their operators?" Then the "net bad" argument disappears.
- gruseom 13y agoIf you're right, then I misread the article, which is quite possible.
- Houshalter 13y agoAnd if you don't like that, no one is forcing you to use it.
- xacaxulu 13y agoEvery driver on the road is a potential uninsured operator. Uber didn't create uninsured drivers. And they require their drivers to be insured. Should we ban all vehicles because they might at some point be uninsured?
- prodigal_erik 13y agoUber got popular in SF even when they only had towncars (which cost more than taxis) simply because their drivers would actually show up. They shouldn't be skimping on insurance, and that's not the only reason they exist.