Slashdot Mirror


How Uber Takes Over a City

schwit1 suggests Bloomberg's story on one aspect of Uber's corporate behavior that may leave a sour taste in the mouth of anyone who'd like to believe the Uber-vs.-the-Cartels narrative. The company hired David Plouffe, known for managing Barack Obama's rise to fame, and many others as well, to help them navigate inevitable and ongoing moves for regulation. The scale is impressive; according to the article: Over the past year, Uber built one of the largest and most successful lobbying forces in the country, with a presence in almost every statehouse. It has 250 lobbyists and 29 lobbying firms registered in capitols around the nation, at least a third more than Wal-Mart Stores. That doesn't count municipal lobbyists. In Portland, the 28th-largest city in the U.S., 10 people would ultimately register to lobby on Uber's behalf. And while the article focuses mostly on the example of Portland, the effort is ongoing and nationwide.

14 of 230 comments (clear)

  1. Re:Damn you Uber by msobkow · · Score: 4, Insightful

    You think an illegal immigrant is going to apply for a commercial driver's license as required by taxi companies?

    Methinks you're confusing "immigrant" with "illegal immigrant." But don't feel too bad. There are millions of bigots like you out there, so you're not alone.

    --
    I do not fail; I succeed at finding out what does not work.
  2. Bullshit narrative ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The Uber vs the Evil Cartels has always been a pile of shit, designed to appeal to a certain kind of idiot who will drool all over it ... but it's a lie, and it's always been a lie.

    It's systematically ignoring laws and regulations while going "wah wah, we're teh underdogs".

    Nothing could be further from the truth.

    Uber are just a bunch of self entitled douchebags, with a lot of backing who throw temper tantrums to insist they be allowed to not be covered under laws.

    Fuck Uber.

    1. Re:Bullshit narrative ... by king+neckbeard · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Uber being self-entitled douchebags doesn't preclude evil cartels.

      --
      This is my signature. There are many like it, but this one is mine.
    2. Re: Bullshit narrative ... by stealth.c · · Score: 4, Insightful

      It's the laws that are bullshit. Look at what kind of service Uber facilitates. How is it that only now anyone is introducing a reputation system to this industry? How is it that only now the barrier of entry to this industry is coming down? What exactly does a stringently controlled supply of government-licensed "taxi" drivers do for the consumer anyway?

    3. Re: Bullshit narrative ... by CrimsonAvenger · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Do you even understand why the medallion system was implemented? I'll give you a hint, it has nothing to do with so-called taxi cartels.

      Let's see. A bit of reading shows that the medallion system was implemented because of "public fears" that taxi drivers were driving too much, and therefore not doing proper maintenance on their vehicles.

      So, the solution to "public fears" was to limit the number of taxis (which would require the taxi drivers to drive even more, thus further limiting their time spent on maintenance, OR to reduce the general availability of taxis, since they'd have fewer taxis working fewer hours each)....

      Yeah, that's a strong argument in favour of the medallion system alright.

      --

      "I do not agree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it"
    4. Re: Bullshit narrative ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

      It's the laws that are bullshit. Look at what kind of service Uber facilitates. How is it that only now anyone is introducing a reputation system to this industry? How is it that only now the barrier of entry to this industry is coming down? What exactly does a stringently controlled supply of government-licensed "taxi" drivers do for the consumer anyway?

      The free market can only produce generally beneficial results when certain conditions are in place, one of the most important of which being the lack of asymmetry of information between customer and supplier. For example, in the restaurant trade customers can judge the service, prices and food quality for themselves and can decide whether the bargain is acceptable. Customers cannot really judge the food safety, due to a lack of opportunity (and prospective customers traipsing through the kitchen might be a hazard in itself), a lack of expertise in microbiology and the "contract-forming cost" of having to do a complete investigation each time before sitting down and eating. Therefore most jurisdictions have laws for government hygiene inspections but not for setting food prices.

      With taxi hire, it is difficult for the consumer to learn many key things about the prospective bargain, such as the competence and record of the driver, the maintenance record of the car and the availability of insurance should there be an accident. It is not efficient for each consumer who wants a ride to summon a taxis/Uber and do in-depth checks on the car and driver, even assuming the consumer has suitable skills in car maintenance, insurance underwriting etc. Plus, the consumer would have to be prepared to repeatedly dismiss low-quality ride offers and wait for a new candidate to turn up. It's not plausible. The free market doesn't work when there are persistent information asymmetries that are expensive (relative to the basic cost) or difficult to overcome. The result is that the low quality businesses drive out the high quality business, because the higher quality businesses can't prove themselves as such to justify a higher price. They can't prove they aren't just boasting.

  3. Re:Damn you Uber by Intrepid+imaginaut · · Score: 5, Interesting

    In many parts of the world taxis are private vehicles with a sign stuck on top, drivers hold their own licenses and companies act as advertising agencies and dispatchers. A recent trend is for one driver to join a company then keep their car running 24-7 as their buddies illegally act as taxi drivers in shifts, splitting the profits. This is an actual thing. Whether or not it's predominantly immigrants, illegal or otherwise, is another question mind you.

  4. Re:Damn you Uber by eulernet · · Score: 4, Interesting

    In France, it has been shown that Uber's drivers are mostly children from immigrants (in french, the politically correct term is "enfants issus de l'immigration").
    Since most of them are jobless, it's a way for them to make money legally.

    The problem is that it destroys the jobs of taxi drivers, but does not create new jobs.
    A journalist calls this "the 'sharing of remains' economy", where the real jobs disappear, and only some small cheap tasks remain.
    The two providers for this kind of economy are Amazon and Uber

  5. Re:GOOD. by fluffernutter · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Unless you have been in a serious accident in an Uber car and had to rely on whatever insurance was in place for treatment, you haven't really had the full experience yet.

    --
    Laws are rules for the court, but merely a bottom bar to hit for life. Think beyond laws in your actions always.
  6. Re: Uber isn't stupid by stealth.c · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Americans seem to have a gigantic blind spot when it comes to government corruption. Sure, people tend to nod at generic whining about "corrupt politicians" but they are hopelessly incapable of spotting that corruption when it happens. They will blame non-government actors all day long for making and offering bribes. As for the politicians who habitually take bribes? Crickets.

  7. Why is Uber better? Serious question. by sjbe · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Uber is 1000 times better for transportation than the taxi cartel

    Why? Seriously, I haven't used Uber and the last time I rode in a taxi was years ago so I have no dog in this fight. Why did you think Uber is better? Better service? Better value? Or is just that they are sticking it to The Man? I'm legitimately asking because I just don't really see what is so amazing about Uber as a casual observer. Saying they are "1000 times better" is obviously hyperbole but what makes them better if indeed they are better?

    If they are actually providing a better value then more power to them. I'm definitely for disrupting industries that need disrupting. If the only advantage is that they aren't the incumbent companies then that isn't an adequate reason to my mind to support them with actual dollars. It just not clear to me which is the case here.

  8. Re:Damn you Uber by drinkypoo · · Score: 4, Informative

    You think an illegal immigrant is going to apply for a commercial driver's license as required by taxi companies?

    Hahaha that's a good one. I had to use an alternate SSN with the CA DMV for a while because someone was pretending to be me... a much shorter, more Mexican version of a Mexican. He had a driver's license and apparent right to work. You think the taxi companies, who don't give a fuck about you because they don't have to because they have a monopoly, are going to do their due diligence? No, they're going to do the absolute bare minimum because they think you're just another asshole who needs ferrying, like everyone else, and protecting you is last on their list of things to do.

    --
    "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
  9. Re:Why is Uber better? Serious question. by flopsquad · · Score: 4, Informative

    My wife and I use Uber on a regular basis. We, and most of our friends and acquaintances, have switched to ridesharing platforms and have not looked back. The main reasons are:

    1) Convenience - car to your doorstep in minutes, rather than 20 minutes after the 15 minutes you waited on hold. Immediate availability and prompt, easy service is probaby 90% of the reason we use Uber. Certain use cases are possible now that were highly impractical before, like requesting an Uber from the office at lunchtime and having it be there by the time you get out of the building. I don't live in NYC so street hailing is a long shot and phone dispatch is a long wait.

    2) Ease of Payment - just arriving at your destination completes the transaction on your chosen credit card; no more lies about only accepting cash and dirty looks when the cabbie has to dust off the old credit card imprint machine.

    3) Quality of Service and Ratings - I have had mostly great experiences with Uber drivers, who get 5 stars. I had one that was awful, he got 1 star and a report that he (literally) didn't know how to drive. The ratings seem pretty accurate. In cab world, it's a crap shoot, and the quality of drivers has been 50/50 at best. To be fair, none of the bad cabbies have been as bad as the one awful Uber driver I had. But I've had plenty of great Uber drivers that were better (personality, road knowledge, driving skills) than all but the best few cab drivers I've ever had.

    4) Cost - at least in my region, Uber is not really competing on cost; that is to say they're often as or more expensive than a comparable cab ride. Sometimes, certain rides are a few bucks cheaper, but it's almost never a pricing slam dunk that would drive choice over the above reasons. The cost is always reasonable unless it's big surge, in which case I can choose another RS, a traditional taxi, public transport, etc. They don't pull any funny business with the cost, unlike many cabs I've been in--no games with meter vs zone pricing and haggling over a short ride that somehow costs double what's on the sticker.

    For us, the Uber platform has just been a hands-down better experience. It's not a bunch of hoopdies offering cut rate prices, it's a fast, no-hassle experience for which we frequently pay extra.

    --
    Nothing posted to /. has ever been legal advice, including this.
  10. Re:Damn you Uber by eulernet · · Score: 4, Insightful

    but that your argument relies on an assumed, and unjustified, premise.

    It's not my argument. Here is the original article in french:
    http://www.slate.fr/story/1034...

    This in turn could lead to more taxi journeys, or more jobs in other service sectors, as people spend that saved money elsewhere

    Yes, there is this theory about redistributing money, but I call that bullshit.

    People who take a taxi are not the poorest ones.
    When you take a taxi, it means that you can afford it (there is an amusing story about an INA director who spent 40,000 euros on taxis each year).
    When you have no money, you use the public transportation (it's reasonably cheap in France).

    It's easy to criticize the taxi drivers, because they are too expensive.
    If you were in the shoes of a taxi driver, don't you believe that this system is killing your job ?

    Right now, programmers and system admins are very expensive.
    Let's imagine an Uber for our jobs in a near future.
    I'm sure that you'll enjoy this service.
    After all, this is called "progress" and "free market" !