4 ms·
No. Just no. There is absolutely nothing in this ruling that justifies your rant. Uber is not special, they are not doing anything unique, and as such do not ju
by s73v3r 11y ago
No. Just no. There is absolutely nothing in this ruling that justifies your rant. Uber is not special, they are not doing anything unique, and as such do not justify having special treatment under the law. There is absolutely no reason why Uber shouldn't have complied with the law from day one.
Further, I don't see why I should be upset at this ruling making it harder for rich companies to shift more and more of their expenses on working class employees. If anything, even if we reduced the scope of government, this is still something they should be doing.
- CamperBob2 11y agoNo. Just no. There is absolutely nothing in this ruling that justifies your rant. Uber is not special, they are not doing anything unique, and as such do not justify having special treatment under the law. Your point isn't wrong, but I suspect you weren't speaking up when the taxi companies bought these laws in the first place.
- rebootthesystem 11y ago> rich companies to shift more and more of their expenses on working class employees Have you ever started and run a non-trivial business? No, publishing an app in the app store doesn't count. Ten, twenty or thirty employees "brick and mortar". Anyone who has done so looks at your statement as what it is: ridiculous. Did you even bother to fire up a spreadsheet and figure out Uber's cost structure and how it relates to what they charge and what drivers make in relation to their costs. Of course not. That much is obvious.