3 ms·
I agree, but I don't see that being the case as often with anti-rideshare efforts as I do with anti-Airbnb efforts. Perhaps my own biases are at play. Where do
by HelloMcFly 12y ago
I agree, but I don't see that being the case as often with anti-rideshare efforts as I do with anti-Airbnb efforts. Perhaps my own biases are at play. Where do you see the need for regulations and restrictions of rideshare services that benefit the consumer? In Seattle they made it sound like it was about consumer protectionism, but it ended up looking a lot more like the city protecting a business model while paying lip-service to safety.
I want to regulate on safety and general welfare, not on choice.
- rtpg 12y agoTo expand on this point: I think that most people agree that some sort of vetting process is good (would you get into a complete stranger's car?) Uber and the like seem to have good ways of holding on to good drivers: the feedback loop is in place and seems to work. The safety problem seems to solve itself With airbnb the problem becomes more complicated because service users can also cause problems (moreso than in most things). But by the nature of the service there are two issues: - service providers (the subleters ) might not be around to give good feedback - neighbors are likely not giving feedback There's no good quality control on the people staying in the house and neighbors suffer.