4 ms·
That wasn't clear from your original post. You're also being disingenuous in your argument. No, of course I do not support discrimination on the basis of race o
by bradleyland 11y ago
That wasn't clear from your original post. You're also being disingenuous in your argument. No, of course I do not support discrimination on the basis of race or economic class.
Race is not equivalent to "type of passenger or destination" though. The latter is a much more vague definition. Like it or not, things like distance, roadway accessibility, and desired route impact the cost of a fare, and regulating that away isn't something I openly accept as the best solution.
- JohnTHaller 11y agoThe thing is, there is a huge correlation between race and destination in nearly all major cities. Drivers tend not to want to travel to outer/poorer areas because (1) they are less safe, (2) there are more minorities, (3) they are less likely to be able to pick up a fare for a return trip. So, cabbies used to discriminate based on destination. And, because these destinations correlate with race so well, they'd discriminate based on race as well. So, NYC and other cities have outlawed a taxi driver's ability to discriminate based on destination. Companies like Uber, however, discriminate based on destination and, thus, race.
- discardorama 11y ago> The thing is, there is a huge correlation between race and destination in nearly all major cities. Exactly. You're at a bar in SF near closing time (2AM) and need a ride to Hunters Point or Bayview? Suddenly, "surge pricing" is in effect! However, if you need a ride to Pac Heights or the Marina? No problem! This may not seem like discrimination based on economic class/race, but it sure is.
- tzs 11y agoThere are fare components for mileage and time, which should deal with distance, roadway accessibility, and desired route. Needing surge pricing to get them to pick someone up in Oakland should not be necessary.