3 ms·

why doesn't it seem unreasonable? I mean, why can't it be up to the person using the app to call that driver or not? The app has the person's name, their rati

why doesn't it seem unreasonable? I mean, why can't it be up to the person using the app to call that driver or not? The app has the person's name, their rating from other customers, etc. Why can't the individual consumer decide what to do with that information ?

mmarx 11y ago
>> Not all laws are in place to mess with Uber or suppress competition, some of them are actually to the benefit of the public. Requiring insurance or having the driver registered as self-employed doesn't seem unreasonable. > why doesn't it seem unreasonable? I mean, why can't it be up to the person using the app to call that driver or not? How could it possibly be reasonable to leave it up to the person using the app to decide whether the driver requires insurance or not, when an accident may easily lead to a third party having claims against the driver?
- vasilipupkin 11y ago
  muddling the issue. At least in Chicago, drivers are already required to have insurance. Why do they need to have special additional insurance if they are Uber drivers? But, again, in Chicago, the city and state worked this out with Uber and came to a compromise.
  - mmarx 11y ago
    If insurance is required in any case, there's no choice left for the app user to make, so why should it be left to them? That said, I very much doubt that the required insurance covers comercial transportation of passengers (which uber certainly is), so that explains why they need “additional” insurance covering that.
    - vasilipupkin 11y ago
      as I said in other comments, insurance here is red herring. because the real difference in cost comes from requiring the license for hundreds of thousands of dollars and the city only issues a limited number of licenses
mrweasel 11y ago
I don't believe that you as the customer should be responsible for checking the drivers insurance, or if the car is in working order. I'm not qualified to do either of those things. Similarly I would like people who accept my money for services to be well do the proper paper work for the tax authorities. If you're self-employed in any other business you need to register that, why should Uber drivers be excepted? I can accept Ubers argument that their drivers are "independent contractors", regardless of how stupid I believe it is, but then they should be registered as such. I don't disagree that many of the rules around taxi services are obsolete or hinder competition, but I also don't condone Uber just breaking all rules using that argument. "Disruption" can't be an excuse to pick and choose which laws to follow. There's a pretty good business case to be made for breaking the speed limit as well (They could call it UberHyperDrive, for people in a rush), but you wouldn't accept that either.
- vasilipupkin 11y ago
  Insurance argument is a red herring because people who drive cars are already required to have insurance, irrespective of Uber. We are talking about some special form of insurance on top of that. Uber can actually either self insure drivers or get very very cheap insurance for them because they know who the good drivers are.

mmarx 11y ago

>> Not all laws are in place to mess with Uber or suppress competition, some of them are actually to the benefit of the public. Requiring insurance or having the driver registered as self-employed doesn't seem unreasonable. > why doesn't it seem unreasonable? I mean, why can't it be up to the person using the app to call that driver or not? How could it possibly be reasonable to leave it up to the person using the app to decide whether the driver requires insurance or not, when an accident may easily lead to a third party having claims against the driver?

vasilipupkin 11y ago
muddling the issue. At least in Chicago, drivers are already required to have insurance. Why do they need to have special additional insurance if they are Uber drivers? But, again, in Chicago, the city and state worked this out with Uber and came to a compromise.
- mmarx 11y ago
  If insurance is required in any case, there's no choice left for the app user to make, so why should it be left to them? That said, I very much doubt that the required insurance covers comercial transportation of passengers (which uber certainly is), so that explains why they need “additional” insurance covering that.
  - vasilipupkin 11y ago
    as I said in other comments, insurance here is red herring. because the real difference in cost comes from requiring the license for hundreds of thousands of dollars and the city only issues a limited number of licenses

mrweasel 11y ago

I don't believe that you as the customer should be responsible for checking the drivers insurance, or if the car is in working order. I'm not qualified to do either of those things. Similarly I would like people who accept my money for services to be well do the proper paper work for the tax authorities. If you're self-employed in any other business you need to register that, why should Uber drivers be excepted? I can accept Ubers argument that their drivers are "independent contractors", regardless of how stupid I believe it is, but then they should be registered as such. I don't disagree that many of the rules around taxi services are obsolete or hinder competition, but I also don't condone Uber just breaking all rules using that argument. "Disruption" can't be an excuse to pick and choose which laws to follow. There's a pretty good business case to be made for breaking the speed limit as well (They could call it UberHyperDrive, for people in a rush), but you wouldn't accept that either.

vasilipupkin 11y ago
Insurance argument is a red herring because people who drive cars are already required to have insurance, irrespective of Uber. We are talking about some special form of insurance on top of that. Uber can actually either self insure drivers or get very very cheap insurance for them because they know who the good drivers are.