5 ms·

Riders do not set the rates of "demand based pricing". There is a set floor price for a car ride with uber. If no one is riding the price is still set in stone.

Riders do not set the rates of "demand based pricing". There is a set floor price for a car ride with uber. If no one is riding the price is still set in stone. Increasing prices based upon arbitrary percentage utilization does not make it a 'free market'.

jacobr1 11y ago
The idea would be for drivers to in some way set the price - not riders.
zaroth 11y ago
Rates are variable, and drivers choose when to drive. I've taken several rides where the driver only works during "surge" hours. What am I missing here?
- dragontamer 11y ago
  Drivers didn't set the rate. Ebay for instance, the suppliers set the prices. Amazon Marketplace: the seller sets the prices (not Amazon). Uber sets the prices, NOT the free market.
  - ahallock 11y ago
    You're misusing free market. If the gov had set Uber's prices, you'd be correct. This is just Uber's model (regardless of the whole employer/contractor debate). Another competitor is free to come up with a different model where driver's can set the rate.
    - dragontamer 11y ago
      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_market https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_market > A free market is a market system in which the prices for goods and services are set freely by consent between vendors and consumers, in which the laws and forces of supply and demand are free from any intervention by a government, price-setting monopoly, or other authority. Uber is a price setting monopoly, the "sole authority" of the price within the Uber "marketplace". Consumers do NOT have any ability to change the price. Nor do any of the Uber drivers. Taxis never were a free market either. But at least they didn't pretend to be one like Uber does.
      - ahallock 11y ago
        You're speaking as if Uber exists in a vacuum with no competitors. And consumers do have the ability to change the price, though not directly. They could go with a taxi, use Lyft, ride a bike, take a bus, buy a car, etc--all factors that influence the demand and thus price for such services.
        dragontamer 11y ago
        Lets select "this spot" as the primary arguing point, okay? Uber has one job. Connect riders with drivers. The "libertarian" solution is to provide a marketplace where drivers can sell their services to riders. Drivers can compete against each other by raising or lowering prices, while riders can compete against each other by similarly increasing or decreasing the bid. Uber pretends to do this, but with a distinct difference. Uber sets all the prices. Therefore, Uber is anything BUT a free market. Maybe you don't get it because you haven't been paying attention to Uber marketing. But I'm not claiming that Uber has no competitors. What I'm saying is within Uber's "marketplace" of "independent contractors", the drivers and riders are in fact helpless to Uber's pricing whims. Uber is NOT a free market. But they are trying to market themselves as one. This is a distinct reason why Uber drivers have been declared to be employees.
        ahallock 11y ago
        edit: remove snark > The "libertarian" solution is to provide a marketplace where drivers can sell their services to riders. States create solutions. The libertarian "solution" is to do nothing and let the interactions happen organically. This could mean a marketplace, it could mean other things. It really depends on what people want, the locality, technology available, etc. And sometimes people actually want a monopoly and are happy with that. Facebook is practically a monopoly and I don't think people want 2 main social networks. > Uber pretends to do this, but with a distinct difference. Uber sets all the prices. Therefore, Uber is anything BUT a free market. I agree that Uber by itself is definitely not a free market place. I'll take your word that their marketing paints a different picture--seems likely.

jacobr1 11y ago

The idea would be for drivers to in some way set the price - not riders.

zaroth 11y ago

Rates are variable, and drivers choose when to drive. I've taken several rides where the driver only works during "surge" hours. What am I missing here?

dragontamer 11y ago
Drivers didn't set the rate. Ebay for instance, the suppliers set the prices. Amazon Marketplace: the seller sets the prices (not Amazon). Uber sets the prices, NOT the free market.
- ahallock 11y ago
  You're misusing free market. If the gov had set Uber's prices, you'd be correct. This is just Uber's model (regardless of the whole employer/contractor debate). Another competitor is free to come up with a different model where driver's can set the rate.
  - dragontamer 11y ago
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_market https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_market > A free market is a market system in which the prices for goods and services are set freely by consent between vendors and consumers, in which the laws and forces of supply and demand are free from any intervention by a government, price-setting monopoly, or other authority. Uber is a price setting monopoly, the "sole authority" of the price within the Uber "marketplace". Consumers do NOT have any ability to change the price. Nor do any of the Uber drivers. Taxis never were a free market either. But at least they didn't pretend to be one like Uber does.
    - ahallock 11y ago
      You're speaking as if Uber exists in a vacuum with no competitors. And consumers do have the ability to change the price, though not directly. They could go with a taxi, use Lyft, ride a bike, take a bus, buy a car, etc--all factors that influence the demand and thus price for such services.
      - dragontamer 11y ago
        Lets select "this spot" as the primary arguing point, okay? Uber has one job. Connect riders with drivers. The "libertarian" solution is to provide a marketplace where drivers can sell their services to riders. Drivers can compete against each other by raising or lowering prices, while riders can compete against each other by similarly increasing or decreasing the bid. Uber pretends to do this, but with a distinct difference. Uber sets all the prices. Therefore, Uber is anything BUT a free market. Maybe you don't get it because you haven't been paying attention to Uber marketing. But I'm not claiming that Uber has no competitors. What I'm saying is within Uber's "marketplace" of "independent contractors", the drivers and riders are in fact helpless to Uber's pricing whims. Uber is NOT a free market. But they are trying to market themselves as one. This is a distinct reason why Uber drivers have been declared to be employees.
        ahallock 11y ago
        edit: remove snark > The "libertarian" solution is to provide a marketplace where drivers can sell their services to riders. States create solutions. The libertarian "solution" is to do nothing and let the interactions happen organically. This could mean a marketplace, it could mean other things. It really depends on what people want, the locality, technology available, etc. And sometimes people actually want a monopoly and are happy with that. Facebook is practically a monopoly and I don't think people want 2 main social networks. > Uber pretends to do this, but with a distinct difference. Uber sets all the prices. Therefore, Uber is anything BUT a free market. I agree that Uber by itself is definitely not a free market place. I'll take your word that their marketing paints a different picture--seems likely.