5 ms·
>This is the same reason Uber is facing a lot of flak right now from governments around the world. It isn't though. Governments are in conflict with Uber becau
by anon1385 12y ago
>This is the same reason Uber is facing a lot of flak right now from governments around the world.
It isn't though. Governments are in conflict with Uber because of things like Uber drivers not being insured. The German government wants Uber to ensure that their drivers are insured. Uber refused to do that. That is why Uber was 'banned'.
Uninsured drivers is a cost spread across society, but the gains are concentrated with Uber. Exactly the kind of situation where government should be stepping in. People can hand-wave all they like about 'new technology' and 'disruption' but at the end of the day the vasty majority of people in society think drivers should have valid insurance and there is no sign of that opinion shifting. There is no need for a 'fix' to government in this case. It is working as it should.
The fact that Silicon Valley gurus are backing Uber so strongly in their quest to fill our roads with uninsured drivers just makes the rest of the world view them as greedy sociopaths looking to make society more dangerous for their own personal gain. Sadly the rest of the technology sector then gets tainted by this asshole behaviour.
- deleted 12y ago[deleted]
- briandear 12y agoUber drivers are insured. It's a requirement to drive a car. The opposition to Uber is because te cities lose out on the punitively expensive tax medallion revenue.
- makomk 12y agoStandard insurance policies have restrictions that exclude driving other people for money. As soon as you do that, your insurance policy is invalid and you're driving uninsured. (Also, I believe Germany has specific minimum insurance requirements in law for taxi drivers and equivalents.)
- CaptainZapp 12y agoCan you provide a reliable source that German Uber driver carry commercial insurance? While you're right that in order to drive a car you need insurance such insurance is personal and never pays for damage, which results from commercial transactions. Note also that there's a difference in third party liability insurance between the US and Europe. While In the US the person usually carries insurance, which is also valid when she, say, rents a car, this is not the case in Europe. The insurance is bound to the vehicle and not the person. I for one, would be very, very vary to take an Uber anywhere in Europe unless the company can prove beyond a doubt that they, or the driver carries adequate insurance to cover any damages to me, or my property.
- jmckib 12y agoYou seem to have your facts wrong. https://support.uber.com/hc/en-us/articles/202347808-In-the-US-what-insurance-is-available-if-there-s-an-accident- https://support.uber.com/hc/en-us/articles/202347808-In-the-... http://blog.uber.com/uberXridesharinginsurance http://blog.uber.com/uberXridesharinginsurance
- anon1385 12y agoI'm talking about the case in Germany. Why are you linking to articles that start with the words "In The US"? This is the kind of blind defence of Uber that gives the entire tech sector a bad name.
- fabian2k 12y agoIt's more complicated than that, insurance was a big issue in Germany. There is a mandatory minimum of 7.5 million EUR for damages to persons in Germany, the insurance offered by Uber was lower than that according to the news a while back. There were also other issues in Germany like the mandatory health check for taxi drivers and the shorter intervals for the mandatory car maintenance for taxis.
- jmckib 12y agoAh, ok. Some of those regulations sound quite absurd to me, but I'm not familiar enough with the situation to comment.
- bdlbdl 12y agoActually, Germany is allowing Uber now. Their court overturned the ban a month ago: http://www.nytimes.com/2014/09/17/business/international/uber-ban-in-germany-is-lifted-by-court.html http://www.nytimes.com/2014/09/17/business/international/ube...