Slashdot Mirror
Anti-Uber Taxi Protest Blocks Access To Airports In France
An anonymous reader writes: Taxi drivers in France have been complaining that a recently passed law against unlicensed commercial drivers is being flouted by Uber, and going relatively unenforced by authorities. They claim to have lost 30% of their income to Uber over the past two years, and they've become fed-up with the situation. The taxi drivers have now started an indefinite, nation-wide strike in protest. Part of that strike involves blocking access to Paris's Roissy airport as well as the main road encircling the city. Protesters have also blocked access to train stations in Merseille and Aix. "The drivers — who have to pay thousands of euros for a license — say they are being unfairly undercut by Uber, which is not licensed by the authorities. Prosecutors have cracked down on Uber, filing almost 500 legal cases involving complaints about UberPOP. About 100 attacks on Uber drivers and passengers have been reported in recent weeks."
Uber is taking away our right to treat customers like shit! Now these Uber drivers with their fancy daily bathing practices, non-arrogant attitudes, and actual fair pricing are taking wine from our baby's mouths! WE WANT OUR MONOPOLY BACK!!!
SJW's don't eliminate discrimination. They just expropriate it for themselves.
If you want to quit your job, or go on strike, or just not work well at your job, that's between you and your employer. If you're not happy with the government, go protest at a government building.
However, you don't get to stop others from getting where they're going. That's what a gang does. It's physical violence (unless you come up with some non-physical form of stopping people from getting where they're going, but I imagine this is the typical "let's set up a barrier and beat up anyone that climbs it" gang mentality). Hopefully the police restore order through arrests.
You call for a ride, and arrest/fine the driver when her or she arrives. It's not like they're hiding out in the mountains of Afghanistan.
Is it just my observation, or are there way too many stupid people in the world?
They can protest the uneven playing field.... but attacking uber drivers just because they are taking a chunk of the customer base is way off line.... Jimmy Hoffa would be proud.
I don't really have very strong feelings in this debate, but that kind of protesting isn't acceptable. Standing outside a government building or your company's HQ to protest, that's perfectly fine. However, once you start interfering with other people's lives (who aren't involved in this at all), I view that as unacceptable and utterly puerile. While I don't call for arrests like the other people who've posted ahead of me, I do hope the police force open the roads.
"Set a man a fire, he'll be warm for the rest of the night. Set a man afire, he'll be warm for the rest of his life."
I guess the name Uber would upset the French, after all they get to hear deutschland über alles everytime the Germans invade...
What's illegal about protesting illegal government actions? Uber is ILLEGAL in France but they continue to operate! Do you understand the concept of "protest"? The idle rich like you are SUPPOSED to be inconvenienced, it is the INTENTION that you get annoyed.
Technically, they should already have 'a monopoly'. They're putting up these blocks because the government is unwilling or unable to actually enforce previously existing laws OR the new law that was passed back in October 2014.
And since governments don't take too kindly to protests against its own institution (you may protest.. you know, somewhere out in a field where nobody's bothered by it, sees it, and you accomplish nothing - there's a good little citizen), they've taken to these measures.
Whether that will result in the law getting enforced, or ferrying people about is turned into a free for all (in which case the 'official' taxi drivers should not have to get a license and pay for that either), for the time being they have every right to be upset; not so much at Uber, but certainly at the French government.
Though if you think this is bad - keep an eye on Calais and the French government's unwillingness to deal with that clusterfuck.
These protests just make me want to avoid taxis and only use Uber. I don't live in France.
You'll want to avoid Paris in general when travelling by air; pick a different airport to change flights if you can. Good advice from my travel agent. If it isn't the cabbies on strike, it'll be the air traffic controllers, baggage handlers, caterers, customs officers, cleaning staff, or the guys with the lollipos guiding the planes to the terminal.
If construction was anything like programming, an incorrectly fitted lock would bring down the entire building...
WRONG!
the government offer FREE OF CHARGE all taxi license in france. Taxi drivers create a BLACK market selling license as high as 250'000 euros! are they paying taxes on this sum? are they controlled? i dont think so
If it's so hard to be a taxi driver.
Why don't the cab drivers move to Uber so they don't have to pay the licensing fees and are on an even playing field?
Because something is illegal doesn't make it wrong and enforcing all passed legislation is impossible in most countries. Most police officers use their discretion to enforce practical laws (when is the last time you were ticketed for jaywalking?). The legislation in question is a protectionist movement for jobs that will die anyways. Its like protesting immigrant workers taking cruise liner jobs as the cruise ship is sinking into the ocean.
Brilliance without wisdom, power without conscience. Ours is a world of nuclear giants and ethical infants.
What is illegal is attacking Uber drivers and damaging (in some cases burning) their vehicles. Do YOU understand THAT?
It's "Marseille," not Merseille. Merci.
Because attacking people is a perfectly reasonable form of protest.
The cabbies themselves already did a great job in making me want to avoid taxis (in the Netherlands). Refusing short rides, overcharging, and if you argue with them they'll put you out of their vehicle on the highway (if you're lucky) or just stab you (if you're unlucky). Sure, Uber should stick to the law, but I am hoping that we'll see a legal "2nd class" tier of cabs, like the Private Hire scheme they have over in the UK. Uberpop should fit nicely into that. I've had a few very good experiences with the service until they clamped down on it.
If construction was anything like programming, an incorrectly fitted lock would bring down the entire building...
If the police won't enforce the law against unlicensed commercial drivers providing taxi services using improperly licensed vehicles, then what choice do those following the law have?
The fact of the matter is that Uber's business model appears to be, "We're on the Internet, so we don't have to follow your regulations."
Go on, citizen, stamp the vote card. R or D, your choice.
what illegal government actions? what is the government doing that's illegal? the only implication in TFA is that the govt isn't cracking down on uber as much as the taxi drivers would like. this is hardly an illegal action.
I don't really have very strong feelings in this debate, but that kind of protesting isn't acceptable. Standing outside a government building or your company's HQ to protest, that's perfectly fine. However, once you start interfering with other people's lives (who aren't involved in this at all), I view that as unacceptable and utterly puerile. While I don't call for arrests like the other people who've posted ahead of me, I do hope the police force open the roads.
I believe it is exercising the 'l' part to create a sense of 'f' for the purposes of producing 'e'. The previous system of everyone caring only about themselves resulted in those who thought more of themselves having a meeting with monsieur guillotine. C'est la vie!!!
Protests in France? It must be one of the days of the week ending in Y.
or the guys with the lollipos guiding the planes to the terminal.
you're british. this is a british idiom.
You'll want to avoid Paris in general
That's been great advice pretty much since the city was founded.
One thing is protesting, and a very different one is actively preventing people from going about their business. The right to strike is one of the cornerstones of free, democratic societies, but what they are doing goes beyond striking. Apart from this, taxi driver, as a profession, has its days numbered - within a couple of decades self-driving cars will be good enough to replace taxi drivers, at a much lower cost. Unless, of course, taxi drivers are allowed to block the implantation of self-driving taxi cabs.
What a great way to shut down a protest! Hire some thugs to go in there, bust up a few cars, blame it on the protesters. We saw it in Seattle too.
actively preventing people from going about their business.
dimwit, how else will people pay attention? inconveniencing the idle rich IS THE WHOLE POINT of non-violent protesting.
What illegal government actions are they protesting? It seems more like they are protesting the government's impotence.
And TFA contains an account of taxi drivers blocking access to stations and assaulting an Uber user in one case. Protest is fine, but beating the crap out of people? Nope.
All I want is a secure system where it's easy to do anything I want. Is that too much to ask ~~ Randall Munroe
Protesters have also blocked access to train stations in Merseille and Aix.
Merseille? Where that?
Watch this Heartland Institute video
One thing is protesting, and a very different one is actively preventing people from going about their business.
But what if the business you are interfering with is illegal?
Watch this Heartland Institute video
You clearly are not acquainted to French protests, or "manifestations" as they call them. It doesn't take much for property damage to start occurring.
The acceptance or otherwise of a market disrupter like Uber is a good predictor of the future progress and well-being of a country or locality. If statists rule and the status quo becomes a reason unto itself, then expect a drift downwards. The results are not immediate, it is a slow process. First you have France, then Greece, then Cuba, and finally North Korea.
On the other hand, if you welcome change and are willing to let the buggy whip makers perish, then you are Silicon Valley, the USA, South Korea, and more recently Albania, China and India.
I hasten to add for nitpickers that my examples are not perfect - they illustrate a trend. An once again a reminder that there is a delay between cause and effect.
Anyway, on this basis France is finished.
Prove anything by multiplying Huge Number times Tiny Number
People will pay attention and side with Uber. Is that the goal of the protest? The taxi industry won't exist in 5 years in some cities.
Sooo.... why don't the taxi drivers just quit their jobs and go work for Uber instead?
Like, seriously?
Wtf is the problem?
You can tell how powerful someone is by the magnitude of the crime they can commit and be able to get away with.
I'm having an out-of-band experience with mostly headlice on Tooter and Fleeceback!
I can't find a poll to express my important opinion -- has anyone seen the polls? They're not at the coroner where they should be...
It looks like the Yutoob has mixed up javascripts and teh htmls because there sure are lots and lots and lots of videos puked up all over the page. Maybe the Yutoob "dropped" some phat vidz on the ./ FP yo?
Keep up the fine progress forward into infinity and beyond the wild blue yonder where angels fear to tread
Let's see... How about blocking the roadways? Very illegal. Even worse are the violent assaults.
And, unlike Uber's own illegality, the blockings and assaults are malum in se whereas Uber is guilty of merely malum prohibitum.
Welcome to Bill Maher show. Save your class warfare rhethoric until 2017, for the centennial celebrations of the Great October Socialist Revolution.
The "idle rich" don't care, whether a ride costs €20 or €40. It is the rest of us, for whom such trifle sums matter.
In Soviet Washington the swamp drains you.
What a great way to start a protest! Hire some thugs to pretend to be law breaking uber drivers skirting the law, and blame it on uber.
Is this means of protesting legal in France? Blocking access to the airport sounds like more than an inconvenience. It sounds like they are denying the public access to public roads, which could harm people who need access to that airport (perhaps, for example, to get home).
I didn't read the article or anything, so these issues might be addressed. But if my understanding is accurate, the protesters should be arrested and the roads opened back up by law enforcement, not because of what they are protesting, but because of how they are protesting it.
You sound like a medallion owner, or a paid shill for one.
This is based on all of your posts here, not this one.
And you call anyone who disagrees with you "idle rich?" Sounds like you are projecting.
I was unaware of that. I thought he was just being clever.
Thank you for expanding my knowledge. I have now learned two things about it.
(-1: Post disagrees with my already-settled worldview) is not a valid mod option.
Arrest who? The Uber drivers breaking the law or the protestors who are not generally breaking the law?
"File to fit, pound to insert, paint to match" - Aircraft Maintenance 101
yeah in the USA the rioters start wrecking stuff when they lose a football game, that's SO much more important
It is illegal to be critically ill or injured while riding an ambulance?
Those blockade protests show a callous disregard for human life.
The difference is that when these protesters break the law it inconveniences people. When uber breaks the law, it actually makes people's lives more convenient.
Can you please provide the complete moral code that you abide by? In the way I was raised, braking the law is wrong and obeying the law is right. Obviously everyone cannot simply follow their own moral code because then drug dealers would declare themselves "illegal but not wrong". Perhaps if you could provide yours to completion, all of society could just adopt it and we can finally have peace on the insanity of 'the people' selecting the laws that work the best for them.
Laws are rules for the court, but merely a bottom bar to hit for life. Think beyond laws in your actions always.
Is that better than you taking away the right for Uber to treat their employees.. er, contractors? No.. Let's just call them phone associates with no bargaining power whatsoever... is it better that Uber is allowed to treat them like shit? Just because people will do the job doesn't mean that it's right that people are in the position that they have no choice.
Laws are rules for the court, but merely a bottom bar to hit for life. Think beyond laws in your actions always.
When I bought a new car, I had to leave my truck at the lot and come back for it. I tried to get a taxi on three different occasions (I've never been in one before), and all three times I got screwed over; two just didn't show, and the third wanted to charge almost $50 to go less than 8 miles. I installed the Uber app, and had a car in front of my house in less than ten minutes. Only cost $17 for the ride. I will walk or just stay home before I ever take a taxi in this city after that experience.
As far as them inconveniencing everyone, I'm with the above poster: if I was caught in that, I'd do everything I could to avoid them there as well while doing everything I can to support anything that takes them out of business. There are any number of ways they can protest. Disrupting traffic when people need to either get to jobs or possibly a hospital is just doing it wrong.
dimwit, how else will people pay attention? inconveniencing the idle rich IS THE WHOLE POINT of non-violent protesting.
"Non-violent protest" doesn't include flipping cars, burning tires, beating up drivers, and blocking emergency vehicles,
As for "the whole point" - Yeah, look how well shutting down critical infrastructure worked for PATCO.
I feel sympathetic toward cabbies, I really do - Their industry basically died overnight because someone came up with an alternative that makes them irrelevant. All the world's protectionist systems of placards and medallions and special licensing, "poof", suddenly worthless.
Finding new lines of work sucks, no doubt. But when you manufacture buggy-whips, you implicitly depend on the continued use of horse-based transportation to make your living. Similarly, when you deliver low quality rudely-delivered service at a high price and with upcharges for the top 90% of destinations - You implicitly depend on a complete lack of any viable alternatives.
A monopoly is when one company owns the market. Therefore Taxi's aren't a monopoly. If there were only a few operators then it may be an oligopoly, but I'm afraid this isn't the case either. What the taxi industry has is known as a 'viable market'.
Laws are rules for the court, but merely a bottom bar to hit for life. Think beyond laws in your actions always.
http://www.threefeloniesaday.c...
-- I was raised on the command line, bitch
This is the biggest misunderstanding when it comes to not allowing uber drivers in a city. Yes, uber threatens another business model's bottom line and they are going to fight back. However, if you are a city planner and you know that you can not in any form or fashion have unlimited vehicles in a given city, then you have to limit it by charging high license fees. Secondly, the cities in question want people to utilize public transportation more because of their costs to maintain those system and their employees.
Then you can expand this to the tin foil hat folks and state that the more employees a city/state/federal has, the more control over the populace it has....but that's another discussion.
There are no loopholes. It's either legal or it's not.
It was expected that passengers would at least be willing to compensate drivers for gasoline used, but there was also a general practice of passengers giving drivers an honorarium for their time, typically once every other week or so. The latter of these two was not actually permitted to be demanded by the driver, but it was still a general practice among club members, so in the long run, it was still profitable for a driver.
When I first saw Uber, I at first thought it that it was basically the same thing... Can someone explain why Uber can be against the law when the aforementioned carpool club was not?
File under 'M' for 'Manic ranting'
What's illegal about protesting illegal government actions? Uber is ILLEGAL in France but they continue to operate! Do you understand the concept of "protest"? The idle rich like you are SUPPOSED to be inconvenienced, it is the INTENTION that you get annoyed.
Wait, its legal for a mob to block public roads in France?
In the free world the media isn't government run; the government is media run.
Sometimes the law is wrong. Obeying a law that is wrong... is wrong.
APK quotes people (including myself) without context and should not be trusted. Just thought you should know.
"breaking the law is wrong and obeying the law is right"
So gay sex is immoral and wrong (when you're in Zimbabwe) and saying mean things on twitter is wrong (when you're in the united kingdom) and right (when you're in the united states)?
Slavery was right 170 years ago, and the Underground railroad was very, very wrong?
i don't think anyone has argued that Uber should not compete in the market, but compete fairly. Either they follow the same registration and licensing requirements that Taxis do or Taxis don't have to follow those regs either.
But it is a "regulated market", the regulations of which Uber is explicitly not following.
What's illegal about protesting illegal government actions? Uber is ILLEGAL in France but they continue to operate! Do you understand the concept of "protest"? The idle rich like you are SUPPOSED to be inconvenienced, it is the INTENTION that you get annoyed.
Protesting is fine. Here in the USA, we have this crazy thing in our constitution called "free speech" that covers it. Most or all of Europe has no such law. Se we are Americans are totally cool with the whole protesting thing. What myself and others are not at all cool with is blocking access to train stations, beating up people who they don't agree with, and so on. You want to set up protests and carry signs outside of train stations and such? That's great. Some people may be interested and may ask what you are protesting about and may end up on your side as a result. You want to block everybody from using the train? Screw you and your cause. At that point, all those protesters are doing is making the people who can't get to the train sympathize with the other side. I've been to France and in the past I worked for a US office of a big French company. This kind of stuff is why I have really mixed feelings about the French. This kind of a-hole "I am going to screw you over because I have a problem that's not your problem so I'm going to make it your problem too until you get so angry you make my problem go away" stuff is a perfect example of what I really don't like about them.
"About 100 attacks on Uber drivers and passengers have been reported in recent weeks."
Taking a page out the Unions' playbook eh?
The way I was raised, it was wrong and illegal for black people to inconvenience whites by taking seats in the front of the bus.
Taking a train is illegal?
Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
I didn't say you couldn't go change a law you felt was wrong. I am only saying it should be obeyed while it is a law.
Laws are rules for the court, but merely a bottom bar to hit for life. Think beyond laws in your actions always.
yeah in the USA the rioters start wrecking stuff when they lose a football game, that's SO much more important
Well, the French do that to. Also when they win a football game.
Right, and those regulations were put in place through proper legal process. People (taxi's) trusted that legal process and entered the market. Uber's proper course of action is to fight those laws by the same legal process if they don't like them, not to run an illegal business.
Laws are rules for the court, but merely a bottom bar to hit for life. Think beyond laws in your actions always.
France is largely founded on mob rule. 1789 and all that.
Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
Comment removed based on user account deletion
What's illegal about protesting illegal government actions? Uber is ILLEGAL in France but they continue to operate! Do you understand the concept of "protest"? The idle rich like you are SUPPOSED to be inconvenienced, it is the INTENTION that you get annoyed.
You almost sound like you're arguing with yourself...
person A) What's illegal about protesting illegal government actions?
person B) Uber is ILLEGAL in France but they continue to operate!
person A) Do you understand the concept of "protest"?
I know that doesn't totally make sense, but neither does citing the "protest" of illegal government actions while simultaneously lambasting uber continued operation simply because it's ILLEGAL. What the taxis are doing isn't really protest either - they're blocking public services, which is more like a hostage situation, blackmail, or extortion.
Personally, I can't pick a side in this debate. Both seem wrong to me as exaggerated ends of the spectrum...
UBER: it breaks a lot of the significant and good strides that were made within the various taxi systems (though that's city-specific). For example, in NYC, if you get in a taxi, the drive is required to take you wherever you want to go - even out of state. They're not allowed to kick you out. If they do, be sure to take down their badge number (which is required to be displayed prominately) and/or license plate, and report them... none of them want to get in trouble at all because it would risk losing the medalion. There's lots of other (good for the people) rules that go along with being licensed correctly. The service may be doing ok, but discrimination is actual one of its features (whether or not that gets abused).
TAXI: WTF medalion prices and artificial rarity! The exclusive club that was created can go fuck itself. Services like Uber can't comply if they wanted to.
Somewhere in the middle is where things need to be (IMO), but I have no clue how that can be accomplished. Maybe if licensed taxi services could use uber without charge (or very low charge), and they got a special badge or something within uber so one could search for official taxis if they so chose, then it'd help level the playing field (IE. allow people to choose to pick a driver that probably lacks proper insurance, licensing, etc, but also allow people to find those that do carry those credentials).
Hmmm ... I'm not British, but I've heard the bright orange flashlights referred to as lollipops before.
Are you sure about that? Or is this just something you think you heard somewhere?
Lost at C:>. Found at C.
... proper course of action is to fight those laws by the same legal process if they don't like them...
You mean the hopelessly corrupt legal processes that keep entrenched interests in power?
They are not only blocking the airport road, but they are also beating UberPOP passengers and damaging vehicles.
An UberPop customer, Alexandre Berlin, was beaten up by taxi drivers last week-end as he left a club late in the night, using the application after a taxi on strike refused to take him, French newspapers Le Parisien and Le Monde said.
Courtney Love Cobain appeared to have been caught up in the violence as she rode in a taxi from the airport. She tweeted saying her taxi had been ambushed and protesters were "beating the cars with metal bats".
I really don't want to live in a world where anyone has the right to ignore whatever law they wish. It seems like that is the attitude of the day though. Just do what you want and so what if you step on the toes of someone else who thought that they were protected by the legal process. If you are a member of a country, and that country allowed the regulated market to be created, at least respect that and use the process to remove the regulated market if you feel strongly about it. It's called 'civilization'.
Laws are rules for the court, but merely a bottom bar to hit for life. Think beyond laws in your actions always.
In the way I was raised, braking the law is wrong and obeying the law is right.
Only generally true. I was raised in the USA. We still have to deal with the specter of legal slavery, much less the much more recent Jim Crow laws outlining government discrimination against blacks.
Then you mention drug dealers. Do you know that medical Marijuana is now legal in 16 states, and recreational use is legal(or becoming legal) in 4.
So while by federal law a dispenser of medical marijuana is a "drug dealer", but is it morally wrong to be dispensing a drug to patients where it provides measurable improvements to their quality of life? Inhaled THC is very good at reducing nasea and stimulating the apatite, which factors nicely for countering some of the effects of chemotherapy.
Spelling Nazi: breaking the law,
I don't read AC A human right
Wrecking stuff and attacking innocent people is unacceptable, no matter who does it. I think we need to get over justifications for bad behavior based on this sort of thing. These cabbies are not revolutionaries fighting for freedom, they're fighting for the status quo which is clearly something that could use changing to some degree.
Shitty companies like Uber become popular because status quo bureaucratic scenarios like taxi cab medallions don't get reformed and taxi companies are allowed to become unresponsive to customers. And when customers are not responded to, they stop caring that taxi cab companies start losing jobs. That allows sleazy operators like Uber to elbow in.
Violent strikes perpetuates dislike of cab companies, something that they didn't need help with already and will continue to backfire on them even if the government knuckles under.
> implying The People select the laws
> Can you please provide a complete moral code
Our Betters have spent thousands of years trying to build a Complete Moral Code, even parts at a time. Many of them were even sincerely for everyone's sake. It'll be thousands more before Richelieu's quote can sleep.
yeah that's what the republicans are all saying about roe v wade
in Britain they have crossing guards at school entrances who hold up round stop signs on sticks. they are called lollipop men or lollipop ladies.
No, taxi licensing and regulation need to be DRAMATICALLY changed before that. The entire system is corrupt and needs to be purged BEFORE any real progress is made.
Good-bye
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
Just a Tuna in the Sea of Life
"Right, and those regulations were put in place through proper legal process" This is no way means its right or moral, only that a group of people decided it. Taxi regulation is corrupt to the core, so saying it was enacted by legal due process is technically correct, its also a meaningless point.
Good-bye
Are you trying to make a point?
APK quotes people (including myself) without context and should not be trusted. Just thought you should know.
Driving a taxi might be the most dangerous profession in the USA,
I'm pretty sure the most dangerous profession in the USA is internet content police.
and now you have young people with no experience of the world just deciding to moonlight as a taxi driver
As opposed to deciding to do it full-time.
A taxi driver is basically a crime victim that you call and tell them where to go so they can get robbed.
Interestingly, both drivers and passengers have to log into the app in order to play.
Just another profiteering empire built off people's desperation and ignorance.
Welcome to our world. Have some capitalism.
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
That's kind of funny, actually.
Nonetheless, on this side of the Atlantic, I've definitely heard those orange flashlights for moving around the planes called lollipops.
Whether it's a common term or not, I have no idea.
Lost at C:>. Found at C.
What's illegal about protesting illegal government actions?
In most of the world, restricting traffic willfully is illegal.
Uber is ILLEGAL in France but they continue to operate!
And because the government made it ILLEGAL it must be BAD and therefore THEY MUST BE PUNISHED, right? Statist tool, useful idiot.
The idle rich like you are SUPPOSED to be inconvenienced, it is the INTENTION that you get annoyed.
Because god damn it, people need buggy-whips!
Taxis fucking suck. Taxi drivers commit crimes against passengers all the time, a taxi license won't protect you from that. Taxi licenses are bullshit, and all the arguments in favor of them are bullshit except the need for increased safety inspections for vehicles being driven more than the normal number of miles. The need for additional insurance is real, but that's a separate issue from a taxi license. Here's an example of a reasonable law intended to protect consumers: require that every vehicle-for-hire provide you some instantly-verifiable (online code, QR, etc.) proof of insurance and safety inspection. Here's an example of a bullshit law intended to make money: You have to have a license to get paid to drive someone somewhere.
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
In the way I was raised, braking the law is wrong and obeying the law is right.
You were raised by sophomoric incompetents. So was I, don't feel bad; they taught me the same bullshit, and I had to unlearn it. Even in the most rational of nations, there are bad laws which are wrongfully applied to the populace. You have not just a right but an obligation to fight against these laws; to do anything else is to lend them your silent complicity.
Obviously everyone cannot simply follow their own moral code because then drug dealers would declare themselves "illegal but not wrong".
It's interesting you mention that, since all the available evidence shows that if you treat drug addiction as an illness instead of a crime, you have better results reducing it. An eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth leaves the world blind and toothless, and punishing people for their sickness just leads to people who are both sick and punished.
Perhaps if you could provide yours to completion, all of society could just adopt it and we can finally have peace on the insanity of 'the people' selecting the laws that work the best for them.
Perhaps. Or more likely, even if his entire moral code made sense, you'd shit on it, knock over all the pieces, and declare victory.
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
I feel sympathetic toward cabbies, I really do - Their industry basically died overnight because someone came up with an alternative that makes them irrelevant. All the world's protectionist systems of placards and medallions and special licensing, "poof", suddenly worthless.
Fuck cabbies right in their part-of-the-problem ears. We wouldn't even goddamned have them today if not for auto companies sabotaging public transportation. We'd just have better public transportation, and more of it. The cars would be on rails and they'd take you where you want to go without a driver. We probably could have done this before the widespread distribution computers with a mechanical autoswitching system, if we'd chosen to. Instead we opted for the illusory freedom of "ownership" of cars which the government can take away from you at any time on any bullshit pretext and the best you can hope for is that you won't have to pay the towing and storage fees. Meanwhile, look at all the pavement we have to pay for.
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
Arrest who? The Uber drivers breaking the law or the protestors who are not generally breaking the law?
Do we know that the protestors are not generally breaking the law? The point of the protest is to block access to the airport, and there are reports of a number of Uber drivers and passengers being assaulted. Even if the majority of protestors are not involved in these assaults, it is likely that the majority of them are deliberately blocking traffic and engaging in harassment of these drivers and passengers. Usually, that sort of thing is illegal, and if you're ordered to stop doing it and fail to do so, that's a crime.
So, are the protestors generally not breaking the law? Because I suspect that they are. Whether their cause is just is a separate issue, and I do not wish to debate it in this subthread.
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
Really? This was modded up too? So lets ignore the fact this looks like obvious flame bate, Ethics is a huge area of philosophy and law and justice is only a small portion of it. You can easily spend a lifetime discussing morals and right and wrong without discussing law and justice.
Brilliance without wisdom, power without conscience. Ours is a world of nuclear giants and ethical infants.
OK.. Then arrest everybody who's breaking the law....
"File to fit, pound to insert, paint to match" - Aircraft Maintenance 101
that is probably very true, i am not in that business so can;t speak for it... but it would be par for course.
Comment removed based on user account deletion
Certainly this is not exploitable in any way. I am so glad that Uber put in such a secure system as having to log into an app to hail a taxi. Do I have to get my identity confirmed before I can call an Uber driver?
Just to be clear, this is dramatically more than you have to do before you can call a normal taxi; all you have to have is a voice, a stated location, and access to a phone in order to get one of those. If you've logged into Uber, at least there is some kind of potentially meaningful logging involved. But you ignored this in your rush to mockery. If you had a sensible statement, you'd have made it. Clearly you didn't.
How about some fairness, distribution of resources, freedom from one's life being decided by market forces. Fuck your corrupt capitalism.
Okay, so to be clear, you are against taxi licenses? Because they actually make life harder for people who are not taxi drivers, and there are more of those people than there are taxi drivers. The people have spoken; they have said they want to be able to get unlicensed transport. Why do you want to force them to patronize a corrupt system created by politicians to produce revenue for the state?
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
Comment removed based on user account deletion
Innovation with no restraints on free markets. But when times get tough, drivers run to the applicable labor regulator and claim status as employees. Here's an idea: Drive for Uber as a contractor or get a cab license and go to work for one of the established cab companies. Under the regulator's rules.
Have gnu, will travel.
So jaywalking to save a baby in a runaway stroller is "wrong", but watching it roll past isn't?
Learn to love Alaska
> The legislation in question is a protectionist movement for jobs that will die anyways
Partly true, but not only. No mater what you think of cab service in France (I'm french; they're pretty bad), there is something else more important.
UBER business bypass social system almost entirely. You may love or hate what exist in France (employee protection; taxes ; etc), but you cant
have businesses that bypass those rules, and others that pay for it. I myself run a business and know the amount of money we spend tu run this
system. Sorry, I don't want to pay for UBER's guys. I don't mind if UBER shareholders make cash as long as we play with the same rules.
I live in France, the Taxis charge 90 euros to drop you 20km away from the airport. Their prices are insane, it is no wonder they are making all of this stormshit to protect their cartel.
I love to study history, and I think we are in for some historic changes in the next 40 years.
the biggest change to happen is Efficiency happening to the normal people whom are not rich.
UBER is a great example, taxis are needed, but the business model that had worked is no longer
really valid for the future, so a new and efficient mode is happening. over time UBER like structures
have to/should happen and when they do, the new model will be well regulated.
Happened when ships went from sail to steam, but the longest routes were still sail, into the late
1800 early 1900, last of the sails designs were called windjammers.
again it's happening now in the shipping business... huge vessels, stuff I could never dream of
are now on the water, all in the name of efficiency.
I would not be surprised if ubers next business model would be to sell taxi fleet management
to cities.
if you see me, smile and say hello.
Another story in the Netherlands.
I used to live in the Bijlmer, which is sort of bad neighbourhood on the outskirts of Amsterdam.
Taxi driver would not come when you called, and they didn't bring you home and instead they stop half a kilometre away and you have to walk the rest. Taxi drivers are/where to scared to go there.
In that same neighbourhood there are illegal Taxis which you can take to go where you want.
You know what Taxi drivers do? They go to the Bijlmer to beat up illegal Taxi drivers using baseball bats.
Oh, another story. A few years ago most taxi drivers that where stationed at the Central Train Station in Amsterdam would not drive you to any location within Amsterdam, they only drive to other towns.
They actually had to put a team of police round-the-clock to make sure the Taxis at Central Station would pick up all the passengers. The police is still there after 5 years, just to keep the Taxi drivers in check.
Please, we're 65 millions. Easy on the wide brush. Thanks.
"Non-violent protest" doesn't include flipping cars, burning tires, beating up drivers, and blocking emergency vehicles,
Clearly, you haven't been to France much.
When a large group protests in France, everyone notices (and the authorities usually do nothing).
Comment removed based on user account deletion
Apples and oranges. People rob taxi drivers because you can just get into the taxi, and they carry cash. Uber drivers are picking up people who have registered with Uber and provided a valid credit card. Now, sure, you could register, give a throwaway email address, create, fund, and provide a throwaway credit card, and then try to rob an Uber driver who might not have a single dollar on them. That implies a criminal who at the same time (a) engages in some reasonably sophisticated planning, and (b) decides to go after a very low-yield target.
... it must be Thursday.
Uber thought they were the disrupters.
Comment removed based on user account deletion
No one is forcing anyone to use a transportation service.
That's more than a bit disingenuous, because a lot of people are in a position where nothing else will really do.
Would you want an Uber version of airplanes?
Yes.
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
When you have to mod people Troll for sharing their opinion, you know you're wrong, and your argument can't stand on its own. Thanks for the validation — I shall post twice as many pro-Uber messages.
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
Uber is a company which provides an app and additional technology using cheapest labor (average driver) on the back of cheap labor (taxi drivers) to generate lots of money for those who already have enough. Therefore, do not use Uber. Do not support Uber. Instead support the protest.
By all means you have the right to break the laws that you deem "unjust". We on the other hand have the right to send the police to gas you, beat you and shoot you dead, and charge our lawyers with ruining you families and taking your homes and possessions away. Are you still willing to break the law now?
Consider that, instead of robbing someone of a few dollars, generating a bogus Uber account could make it considerably easier to steal a car.
I'd say that makes an Uber driver anything other than a "low-yield target."
Go on, citizen, stamp the vote card. R or D, your choice.
We on the other hand have the right to send the police to gas you, beat you and shoot you dead, and charge our lawyers with ruining you families and taking your homes and possessions away. Are you still willing to break the law now?
You haven't even found out what laws I don't agree with yet, and you're already threatening me — anonymously? You manage to combine internet bravery and statist bootlicking in the most whorish way possible.
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
From a Telegraph article:
In recent weeks nearly 100 Uber drivers have been attacked, sometimes while carrying customers. In one case, a taxi passenger was left with a broken face and black eye after he praised Uber.
Cabbies attacked the van of Julien Cinquin, a motorist at Porte Maillot, slashing his tyres and the rear window and throwing a banger in the back seat.
The taxi drivers have the right to protest peacefully. But to attack other people - no.
I've read some comments by French people, saying that they were ashamed and disgusted by the violent behavior of some of the strikers. I wonder if there's a way for French people to peacefully protest that kind of behavior. Maybe they can use taxis only when there is no other means of transportation, until the taxi unions apologize for the violence, and remove from union membership any members who attacked anyone.
Or, you could just walk up to somebody at a stoplight on in a parking lot and put a gun in their face. No need to set up an elaborate system with buying a prepaid credit card (assuming they even work with Uber), creating a fake email address, getting a burner smartphone and activating it, etc. etc.
The thing is, professional taxi drivers are very aware of this and it is rare to meet one who doesn't carry a firearm.
Maybe where you are - I've never seen a single story of a taxi driver in NYC using a firearm. Then again, we have reasonable gun laws.
I'm not British and I'd use the same idiom, as would many people in my country.
so
you are wrong, this is an incorrect statement.
when they don't play in a football game, when the sun is up, when the sun is down, when it's raining, when it isn't raining, on days ending in an I (they get Sunday off) though it's more Paris than France in general
Comment removed based on user account deletion
Comment removed based on user account deletion
So are we debating the semantics of "forcing someone" or what?
Well, I guess we're going to have to. If you narrow someone's choices, you have to take some responsibility for that. And we're talking about people who are forced to live in certain places if they want to be members of society. And if you're not a member of society, society will shit on you. So basically, your society is terrorizing these people into taking taxis.
Now, after taking a look at the homicide statistics, does a for-hire driver sound like the kind of job that we should encourage people to just pick up at random, with no training or safety precautions, and pay them less than minimum wage? Stupid as shit. But people are mad desperate for cash
Yes, that's what I said in the first paragraph, essentially. People are desperate. Some of them are desperate enough to take a hire car. Some of them are desperate enough to drive one. But you can't fix that problem by making it illegal to operate as an unlicensed taxi — all you'll do is create a new class of criminal, the unlicensed taxi driver. Whoops! We have those already. Now we have more of them. Why? Because society is terrorizing people into it.
Instead of solving the root problem, you just want to ban people from trying to make a fucking living. That's what's wrong with your whole anti-Uber idea. That's totally fucking misguided. You're being selectively anti-capitalist. When you realize that capitalism is the problem, you'll stop championing protectionist bullshit which doesn't actually solve the problem you want it to solve — because unlicensed taxis are a thing with or without Uber, and as the economy worsens, they become more of a thing. In Costa Rica, they're the norm. Where is our economy headed? We have record unemployment and we're claiming that it's low. But that's a lot of bullshit, we just stopped counting a lot of people and then declared victory.
TL;DR: If you can take time to care about people who aren't taxi drivers yet, why can't you care about the people who are already taxi drivers? Answer, because they're part of the system that makes you comfortable, and as long as you're that, everyone else can fuck off.
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
Oh, so it's okay for Zimbabweans to campaign for gay rights, as long as they stop being gay while they do it.
Un bon mot ne prouve rien.
It's by Voltaire. Not racist though.
But applicable to any quote used as if it is an argument or a self-evident fact. EVER.
Mit der Dummheit kämpfen Götter selbst vergebens
Cabs predate the automobile by a long shot.
Even cities with incredibly good public transportation options still have cabs because there is a natural market for being able to travel *directly* from point A to point B in a more expedient manner than public transportation could ever provide.
I'm out of my mind right now, but feel free to leave a message.....
I was one of those hit by the Eurostar cancellations on Tuesday due to protests by MyFerryLink workers. I chose a slow bus (Megabus) the next day because Eurostar had tickets available on Thursday, and half an hour later for Friday, and I didn't want to stick around. I had to use a taxi to get to the hotel I found on the outskirts of Paris (but the RER would have worked for me too, but my gf was mad enough that she wanted a taxi, since I'll claim the costs from Eurostar anyway). And while on the taxi, the A1 autoroute (motorway) decided to start road works.
While here, I would also like to "thank" SNCF for blocking booking.com searches over their free WiFi at Gare du Nord. Really "helpful" during the Eurostar panic.
As for enforcing laws, it's like those armed patrols they have anywhere are willing to do nothing about the "un Euro" Africans that sell Eiffel Tower keychains and metals things everywhere (including Disneyland) and the "speak English" "charity" beggars that have no official charity affiliation (that say they want "just" a signature, but then have an "amount" column on their sheets)
"Everybody's naked underneath" -- The Doctor
What good are laws? The bad people don't obey them and the good people don't need them.
In 5 years, there will be self-driving cars replacing the Uber AND the Taxi drivers.
Does anyone have a plan for this?
It's fine to say; "Well, just learn something new" when it's not you with a family and a tight budget having to jump into the marketplace and retrain while competing with people who've done that task their entire life -- but not everyone is as superior as the average person on Slashdot.
What do we do for the 'average person' when there isn't an easy alternative?
>>"ad space available -- low rates!!!"
Good on the French - they are doing it right!
We protest stuff in "free speech zones" and our media ignores the people who are championing the average Joe unless someone walks buy in a sequin dress and clown make-up -- THAT GUY they interview. Ratings magic!
The French kidnap a CEO and nobody goes to jail. Maybe instead of making fun of them, we are the suckers, because we go for decade to decade with our prospects and power diminishing, and eventually we wake up being greeters at WalMart with no retirement savings.
We'll be complaining about the same things in a decade, likely.
>>"ad space available -- low rates!!!"
It's a smart idea. It's ridiculously valued, but it's a smart idea.
> taxi drivers are routinely held up at gunpoint or murdered
What you're seeing is taxi drivers badgering the people and government to keep their allegedly shitty jobs. Maybe their jobs aren't as shitty as you think.
What is your opinion about the law abiding citizens of 1930s Germany? In particular as it regards to the Nuremberg laws.
I break the law daily. Well okay maybe like 10 days a year I don't break the law. I don't sweep the footpath outside my house.
It's the law, it has been for over 100 years where I live.
I'm such a rebel.
You are exactly the type of kracker that Dr. King was talking about:
You didn't even read what you were protesting. This bullshit got a +5 too!
And make no mistake my children, there shall be swift and righteous justice on all free-grazers.
No more shall they nibble wantonly at the teat of our coffers.
And that's just exactly like that part in the Bible that applies to that situation.
That causes the legal system to lock up completely as everyone is in jail.
but they have to pay before they get in... ...
They dont have any large amounts of cash on hand
What are you going to steal?
You are going to get more value out of robbing a random street person, rather than going through the effort of leaving a trail back to yourself using Uber.
Uber records your location via GPS, your IP address, and your paypal payment details.
So to rob an Uber Taxi, you need to steal someones phone, hope they have Uber and payment details included, pay that uber taxi driver and then rob them of their wallet.
But it would have been just as valuable as robbing the guy you got the phone off, than hoping he has Uber and getting another wallet off the uber driver.
Compare that with the taxi driver, who has a relatively large stash of cash (because people pay in cash), who picked you up off the street without charging you first.
The safety concern for the driver just isn't comparable.
"Either they follow the same registration and licensing requirements that Taxis do or Taxis don't have to follow those regs either."
* Paris did not increase the number of taxis licence
for about fifty years. At some momebt, it is actually very hard to find a taxi not matter how much you pay.
* Crazy regulations mean that Paris taxis cannot pickup clients in the suburbs and vice-versa.
* Taxi licences are theoretically free but bought on the blackmarket at about 300.000 dollars.
* There is in France are very strong youth unemployment rate which means that many youngs are ready to do absolutely anything for a job, and see this restriction as something fundamentally counter-productive, when thousand of potential clients are ready to pay a lot for a taxi - that they cannot find.
* In Paris, 70% of taxis belong to the same company which is very close to the Socialist power for more than thirty years.
These reasons and many others make that a vast majority of Parisians strongly dislike their taxis.
I don't care what laws you "agree" with and I don't care since you "agreeing" or not with them is irrelevant. What matters is that you have to obey them. If you do not, the consequences for you and your family will be... Unpleasant.
We remove them. It's that simple.
While you're here, you can learn that it has a second 'p' in it.
I do not think Paris public transportations are lacking users so far. It may not be as packed as what you can see on videos of the Tokyo subway or other extreme examples, but I think it is already close to full capacity.
Oh, and it stinks.
Tipping over cars and setting stuff to fire in the streets is illegal. Throwing rocks at the police is illegal. Are you ignorant willfully or are you just plain stupid?
"So long and thanks for all the fish."
And so the flood of Uber shills starts...
To have a right to do a thing is not at all the same as to be right in doing it
Only sheeple follow the law, right?
To have a right to do a thing is not at all the same as to be right in doing it
Welcome to our world. Have some capitalism.
Fortunately, society has moved away from pure capitalism in the last hundred and fifty years or so. Although it looks like Uber fanboys want to see us back in the Nineteenth Century.
To have a right to do a thing is not at all the same as to be right in doing it
You can see why they're annoyed.
Its like if I was running a waste disposal company, and a new company started up in town that just fly-tipped all the refuse and flaunted the regulations. They'd undercut me on price and pretty soon I'd be out of business. I think I'd be within my rights to protest the government to try and get them to enforce the laws that I'm abiding by but my competitors are not, even if it was just from selfish motives
The wisdom of requiring licencing for taxi drivers is up for debate, but with the law as it stands my sympathies certainly lie with the cabbies forking out for licences in accordance with the law.
Does anyone have a plan for this?
Your phrasing implies that we need to have some sort of centrally managed plan to handle the fallout of disruptive technologies. We don't, and realistically, can't.
It's fine to say; "Well, just learn something new" when it's not you with a family and a tight budget having to jump into the marketplace and retrain while competing with people who've done that task their entire life
I run the risk of someone creating a "real" AI today that can out-code any human on the planet. That would instantly put my entire profession on the unemployment line. I have hedged against that threat by choosing positions that allow me to diversify my skillset (both in terms of experience and education), making me qualified to work in any of a dozen broad categories of "professional" positions.
I would recommend cabbies (and Uber drivers, as you point out) start doing the same today - They can already see the writing on the wall, and still have time to act accordingly.
The world changes around us. We need to adapt, or die - Simple as that, really.
Obviously everyone cannot simply follow their own moral code because then drug dealers would declare themselves "illegal but not wrong"
I expect that is very much what they believe. I find it odd that you are unable to imagine to imagine they might think that way.
What matters is that you have to obey them. If you do not, the consequences for you and your family will be... Unpleasant.
And if we do follow the laws, then the consequences for everyone except our oppressors will be... severe.
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
True. But we're more likely to refer to the ground control staff as men with table-tennis bats.
No choice? What about Lyft and other app controlled taxi firms? Ideally a driver ought to be able to have multiple phones with the different apps on, thus accepting ride offers from whoever is the best option at the time.
You don't have to work for Uber to support app-controlled taxis.
I doubt you could provide the entire legal code you claim it is moral to follow? Morality and law are not the same, but hopefully there will be a lot of overlap. As for drug dealers claiming their acts "Illegal but not wrong", in many cases I would agree with them.
What exactly are the thieves going to steal from the driver? Uber rides are paid through your phone with a credit card and they don't accept cash.
Well on Paris, it is near an monopoly.
For 4 years, the state hasn't sold any new taxi license (the license is around 200k-230k EUR right now). Thus keeping the number of taxis in Paris at the same level.
But the biggest problem would be the G7 taxi company that his on a monopoly position on the Paris area (around 80-85% of taxis are linked someway or another to the G7 Taxi group, the others are the few independent that sill exists).
There is a nice article about the taxi lobby (and especially the G7 group) here:
http://tempsreel.nouvelobs.com/economie/20150212.OBS2398/comment-le-roi-des-taxis-compte-contrer-uber-au-detriment-des-clients.html (in french though)
Other than the French taxi drivers calling in Uber then beating them and destroying their cars, is this actually happening more frequently than with Taxi's? Seriously, if you are right this is a big concern. If course I would bet that it wasn't and that you are totally wrong. But then I would just be doing the same as you, making wild ass assumptions without and real data to back it up.