Slashdot Mirror
Getting Over Getting Over Uber: Tim O'Reilly Does the Math
Susan Crawford yesterday published at Medium a critique of Uber and similar ride-coordinating services, in the form of a kind of paean to the American taxicab.
Though she didn't start out with negative feelings for Uber, Crawford writes, her sentiment has swung away from objections to taxis (such as that they seek unfair protection from competition) to an extravagant defense, though it comes with a long list of "shoulds": "[Cities] should be focusing on making their taxi services better," she writes. "Taxis should be more accessible to everyone. Taxi fares should be low, predictable, and uniform. Taxi geographies should be wide. Taxis should be clean, fuel-efficient, driven by trustworthy, well-trained drivers, and available for frictionless electronic hailing." Even with the flaws that list implies, Crawford's description of how well taxis work now is more positive than I've found to be true: "Their rates are regulated and set; their pricing is transparent and can be double-checked (just look at the meter, which is itself regularly tested); they look like a uniform fleet; they are subject to very strict licensing and safety requirements. With rare exceptions, they don’t employ surge/congestion pricing schemes."
Tim O'Reilly has written a response, calling Crawford's arguments "puzzling and unconvincing." O'Reilly dissects some of the math behind the business of driving others for money, as it applies to both conventional taxi drivers and "gig economy" drivers, as well as some of the qualitative effects of ride-dispatch services; surely some readers will take issue with his figures and examples, but they provide a plausible case for doubting Crawford's rosy picture of taxis and dark view of modern app-dispatched rides. O'Reilly writes: "Regulation is not a good in itself. It is a means of achieving public goods. And so far, it is pretty clear that Uber and Lyft (and in particular, the competition between them) are improving the transportation options in American cities. Regulators should be using the opportunity to revisit the old way of doing things rather than trying to make the new conform to outdated rules that no longer serve their purpose."
Tim O'Reilly has written a response, calling Crawford's arguments "puzzling and unconvincing." O'Reilly dissects some of the math behind the business of driving others for money, as it applies to both conventional taxi drivers and "gig economy" drivers, as well as some of the qualitative effects of ride-dispatch services; surely some readers will take issue with his figures and examples, but they provide a plausible case for doubting Crawford's rosy picture of taxis and dark view of modern app-dispatched rides. O'Reilly writes: "Regulation is not a good in itself. It is a means of achieving public goods. And so far, it is pretty clear that Uber and Lyft (and in particular, the competition between them) are improving the transportation options in American cities. Regulators should be using the opportunity to revisit the old way of doing things rather than trying to make the new conform to outdated rules that no longer serve their purpose."
The Left and the governments (a.k.a. also The Left), strongly believe in supply management as the best way to control the economy and ensure a steady income to the undeserving (a.k.a. also The Left).
Now, these new online services like Uber and AirBNB totally avoid the mechanisms of supply management, simply by ignoring them.
The governments and the undeserving are really thrown off their game as they lose control and the population can freely access similar services at non-inflated prices.
I am profoundly uninterested in taxi companies.
...but then a taxi lobbyist dropped a big bag of Benjamins on my desk, and what's a blogger to do?
Taxis are already dead because they're none of those things. That's the shit that matters to the people that pay for the service.
Taxis should be more accessible to everyone. Taxi fares should be low, predictable, and uniform. Taxi geographies should be wide. Taxis should be clean, fuel-efficient, driven by trustworthy, well-trained drivers, and available for frictionless electronic hailing.
Congratulations, you just described Uber, and now understand why it exists.
The only thing limiting availability of Uber in fact, is governments and taxi cartels you seek to improve... if taxis could be any of those things, why aren't they already since they have had decades longer to do so? If you think the "city" can make the taxis into those things, look around at the barley kept -up infrastructure and crumbling streets and answer the hard question of how they could do that one thing well when so many other things have been done poorly.
If wishes were horses I wouldn't need taxis OR Uber, but they aren't so I do
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
Last May when my auto insurance policy renewed there were a few pages enclosed. Adding / detracting language from the previous policy. While not stating Uber or Lyft by name it was clear that the insurance company was writing them completely out of the picture.
say it again. It's not the service, it's how they treat their employees, e.g. by calling them contractors to get out of paying for their Health Care, Unemployment, tax and other benefits (as well as their commercial insurance and proper background checks). Right now Uber is externalizing all those costs. Either onto the driver or eventually society (since we more or less don't just let people die in a gutter in this country, yet...). Their entire business model falls apart as soon as those costs aren't externalized. Look at all the 'Uber for...' companies and how quickly they shut down when their told that they have to treat people who are a core part of their buiness as employees...
Uber is a race to the bottom and a sign capitalism is starting to break down...
Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
I generally avoided Uber, but last year I needed a taxi to get to the airport. I called two different taxi companies, and neither one had any taxis available to pick me up. Uber came right away, and was cheaper than a taxi.
Generally it's easier to get an Uber than a taxi, unless you're right in the middle of a big city. And it will be a long time before traditional taxi companies get their game together enough to equal that.
"First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
"Regulation is not a good in itself."
I wish more people realized that. How many times have you seen people arguing, one side saying, "Regulation is bad!" and the other "Regulation is good!" It's one of the dumbest arguments ever, because both sides are wrong.
Some regulation is good, and some regulation is bad. If you want to know which is which, you need to actually look at the regulation itself.
"First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
I agree that these are strange arguments to make in favour of taxis. The two arguments which I think are in favour of taxis is that you don't need to have a mobile to use them and, because of their cartel nature, they can easily offer guaranteed service at certain locations and times. However I expect that both of these issues could be addressed by an Uber-like service if this was the last hurdle to doing away with regular taxis.
Just because the Taxi cab drivers are being abused doesn't mean Uber isn't abusing their drivers. Here's a crazy idea: Why don't we protect _both_ groups of workers? Crazy? I know, right?
Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
If you're smart enough to know a word like paean, surely you're smart enough to spell it correctly. It only takes a moments to check the spelling of a difficult word. You don't want to look silly do you?
http://grammarist.com/usage/pa...
Surge pricing is exactly the opposite of low, predictable, and uniform.
You know how much you will pay before you get on the car. If it is too expensive, you don't have to take it.
The last time I needed a taxi was to get home from a meeting across town, 40 miles away. The meeting was over at 5pm and I called for the taxi just before that.
I called to check on them again at 6pm.
Then 7pm.
Then 8pm.
Then 10pm.
Then midnight.
At that point, I told them "Look, I've been waiting for SEVEN HOURS for someone to pick me up. It's January. The place I was waiting inside closed hours ago. I've been out in the 10 degree weather for five hours, now. If you can't get someone out here, I''m going to just call the other taxi service and see if they can help me".
The taxi service responded "Sir, you can't do that. If you call two taxi services, we will both blacklist you."
I waited.
I waited.
I waited.
At 5am, I called and canceled my service request, because it was going to take an hour to get home, an hour to get back for the second day of meetings, plus however long to wait for a fucking taxi to pick me up to GET TO THE MEETING AGAIN... so it was safer to just wait four more hours for the meetings to start, wearing the same gross clothes form the day before and on zero sleep and having spent the night on the sidewalk in 0-10 degree temperatures.
The thing is, that wasn't a unique experience Almost every time I have used a taxi service in two different states both in cities of 500,000 to 1,500,000 people, it has taken HOURS for them to show up. HOURS.
So you know what? Fuck taxi services. They're expensive and unreliable. They do NOT serve ANY public good. They can all fucking burn for all I fucking care.
Darn, beaten to the draw again. Obviously I need to take a lesson from Uber and embrace 24x7 agility at the speed of the interwebs and abandon my old-economy paradigms.
I wasn't sure if it was an alternate spelling, but - here's protip for timothy - I found this marvelous thing called a google where you can look things up.
At the bottom of the
That's really a fiction, Uber is only slightly cheaper than Taxis today, that's simply because they need to compete. If taxis went away Uber would max out their prices.
How much will you pay to get out of that dark alley when Uber's tracking shows you have zero alternative choice to their Uber ride? Twice what you'd pay for a taxi, three times? Because the taxi price is metered and fixed you pay the predictable price.
Visit any unregulated city and prepare to be ripped off to the hilt. Because that is what happens when the taxi price isn't regulated, the taxi driver takes advantage of you needing the taxi. That was why meters and regulation was introduced, it consumer protection law.
And as for 'jobbing drivers', they will be like Google publishers, they started out getting 85% of advertising revenue, now its more like 10% with the big websites getting 90%, and them getting the minimum the market will bear since they have no choice. Google gets the profits.
If you get your rides from Uber, Uber will get your profits if it can remove the competition by undermining the consumer protection laws.
In western europe for example, taxi are geographically widespread (for example in germany they are forced to take negative value fare in remote area), their price is regulated but uber is not and uber DO surge pricing. So taxi fare is uniform and predictable (low is a question of perspective). Taxi are driven by trustworthy driver , german regulation make sure of insurance (commercial) is there and there is a test in many country. Uber not so much. Taxi are accessible to everyone as over a zone some country imposes a minimum number of accessible handicapped taxi. All of those Uber does not really do. We even have in germany an apps on smartphone to hail taxi (at least in my region). Uber DO LIE on pretending there is driver nearby. Uber bombed with fake request their rival. Both of which would be a fraud in germany for example. take off the pink glasses in many countries in western europe Uber is not so great , it is only a newcomer which want to break laws to its disadvantage, laws mostly protecting consumer NOT taxi.
Now we know that US law are often corporate blowjobs (dealership, taxi medaillion etc..). But Uber is not so great either. What do you think will happen if taxi get deregulated ? Well i will tell you : the most common minimum denominator that's what will happen.
C. Sagan : A demon haunted world:
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0345409469/
visit randi.org
"Getting Over Getting Over Uber"
Seriously? Who the fuck writes these articles on Slashdot? And "Paeons" ?!?!
This site is going down the shithole.
Oddly, I suggested a story on how Uber drivers are on strike right now at this very moment, and it mysteriously, inexplicably failed to go anywhere!
How could that possibly be? It's an Uber story after all :D
I live in Chiang Mai Thailand. I suggest if you really really like the idea of a 'gig economy' then move here for a few months and see how that idea works out in real life. I don't think you'll care for it much as only a few live a decent lifestyle.
I think you need to look up the definition of astro turfing. Regulation is good if it helps competition I've never understood the medallion system, and it's not relevant for me.
Driving a taxi without a insurance is a big deal for me, since I move intraffic and my lost pay checks will be paid by that insurance. If a driver does not have a professional insurance that will not happen. The stats here says that taxi drivers have accidents about once a year if not more. When this is addressed by Uber then I have no problem with them operating in my city.
Comment removed based on user account deletion
improving the transportation options in American cities
About that. If the cities are unable or unwilling to make deals with a bus or other transportation company making regular routes, it will be only a matter of time before a "ueber bus", that is machine routed, order based mass transport vehicle, will raise up to provide the service. Regular routes would then be a dynamic, emergent property of the needs of the people.
"Their rates are regulated and set; their pricing is transparent and can be double-checked (just look at the meter, which is itself regularly tested)"
Oh how naive. The way taxis rip people off is by taking long routes and adding distance/time. That is specifically the scam that Uber avoids by route planning. If she thinks they are trustworthy just because they have a visible meter, she is an idiot.
I bet she wholeheartedly agrees to see all the recommended specialists every time she goes to the doctor's office, and makes sure to get as many undercarriage coatings as she can from the car dealer because their pricing is transparent too.
while(1) attack(People.Sandy);
Oddly, I suggested a story on how Uber drivers are on strike right now at this very moment, and it mysteriously, inexplicably failed to go anywhere!
How could that possibly be? It's an Uber story after all :D
http://www.latimes.com/busines...
the drivers have four demands: that Uber increase fares by 60% nationwide, that the company add a tipping option to the Uber app, that the ride cancellation fee be raised to $7 and that the minimum fare be increased, also to $7.
I wonder how surge pricing works during the strike?
And yet, people keep claiming Uber is not a tax service.
If they're not a taxi service then drivers should be able to charge what they want without the company dictating the fares, nor have Uber take money from them for each ride.
Or isn't that how a taxi service works?
We will bankrupt ourselves in the vain search for absolute security. -- Dwight D. Eisenhower
Tim O'Reilly said:
"Regulation is not a good in itself. It is a means of achieving public goods. And so far, it is pretty clear that Uber and Lyft (and in particular, the competition between them) are improving the transportation options in American cities. Regulators should be using the opportunity to revisit the old way of doing things rather than trying to make the new conform to outdated rules that no longer serve their purpose."
Yeah, regulation is not the goal , but neither is the goal what he cites- "achieving public goods". That phrase "achieving public goods" sounds like it's conflating "public goods" with "the pubic good". We advance "the public good" when society reforms itself so as to better confer upon ALL our citizens, what Roosevelt called the Four Freedoms: Freedom of speech Freedom of worship Freedom from want Freedom from fear.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
Delivering goods to the public can be done it plenty of ways including slavery, as the Romans did when they built their cities using slave labor.
We don't want to "achieve public goods" at the permanent impoverishment of any of society's members, including the class of "people who make money driving other people around ". That is what the essay she wrote is about. How can we improve taxi service and make it better while not creating a no-winner but the 1% , dog-eat-dog service?
We COULD have a world in which people work for absolutely ANY wage just to stave off sheer destitution. That's exactly where a perfectly free market goes, fast People who own companies don't NEED to make another 50 million opening another branch the way people applying for jobs NEED to make rent, buy food and eat. One said can always simply wait out the other. It's not a long wait. form of that dynamic is what you are seeing when you read about some company closing their plant in state X or country Y to relocate to more "business friendly" climates. If they don't get just what they want, then they have options including delaying for months or years a chance to make more money for themselves. People have stomachs that are on stricter schedule.
So the problem with Uber and Lyft is it replaces a professional workforce that pays a livable wage (they say) with a throw-away workforce that's on their own, "hey, fuck you". The the executives at these companies are the only ones making money (25-30% of *pre-expense* income) and the pocket money their drivers make after shouldering the burden of maintenance, gas, car insurance etc. etc. etc. etc. is just that- pocket money, $12.50 an hour :
http://www.moneyunder30.com/ho...
http://www.fastcompany.com/304...
We have perfectly good examples of what happens to workers, wages and the distribution of society's wealth when people are forced into no-benefit 1099 "private contractor" status which is what Uber and Lyft want to classify their workers as or worse "part-time temp-worker" status. This is the further Walmartization of the economy, the same cost-shifting from the employer and receiver of the good onto the back of individuals. This is the same bullshit Microsoft tried to pull with their workforce. "I'll call you an independent contractor then I am free of any burden of having to provide you any kind of benefit".
It's not a clever "new business model" for a "new economy" if it can basically be described as making money by paying people less to do deliver the exact same service. That's not even a form of efficiency, since an increase in efficiency would mean doing more with less or fewer people. no Uber and Lyft are just opening the floodgates of the labor pool upon what is otherwise a functioning system.
That would be like letting anyone anywhere in the world m
And off his meds. And replying to his own posts. What a moron.
In Sweden taxis were deregulated a long time ago. Or rather supply was. Anyone driving others for profit have to have a driver's license allowing such, but there are no limits to how many such are issued. Any company or individual can serve any area.
There are some requirements on cars driving for profit such as them having to have a certified taxameter, prices clearly shown outside the car etc. However you can charge any price you want as long as it is shown.
It all works fine. I never understood the need for other countries to treat taxis specially.
What the author doesn't understand is that what she says taxis need to be is not accurate. Everything comes at a price. The beauty of a free market is it will tell you how much people are willing to pay for accessibility, predictability, uniformity, cleanliness, fuel efficiency, trustworthiness, and availability. There is absolutely no way for a monopoly taxi service to know these things. There is no feedback to help them adjust. Even Uber can't know these things. It is a process of discovery that needs to be constantly adjusted in a free market.
I love Jesus, except for his foreign policy.
Uber basically wants to do the same thing as H1Bs except with local people. Basically we have a mass of people who are making a livable salary but as consumers we think they cost too much so we usher in Uber despite what the laws say. Sorry but that is no different then crying foul on Disney for spinning the H1B laws and having their domestic employees training the easier foreign once as they get kicked out the door. So before you say H1Bs are a bad thing again, look in the freaking mirror.
Laws are rules for the court, but merely a bottom bar to hit for life. Think beyond laws in your actions always.
Oddly, why didn't you suggest a story on how Taxi drives are on strike right now at this very moment over Uber, which you mysteriously, inexplicably failed to mention! http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/84e1... https://www.bostonglobe.com/bu... http://algarvedailynews.com/ne... http://www.chicagobusiness.com... http://www.cbsnews.com/picture... http://www.abc.net.au/news/201... http://www.dailymail.co.uk/new... http://www.theguardian.com/tec... https://euobserver.com/connect... http://www.wftv.com/videos/new... http://in-cyprus.com/nicosia-t...
This is one of those situations where detailed opinions and analysis are of little worth compared to the invisible hand of the market. Of course market forces can be distorted by regulations (worthwhile or not) but eventually economics prevails if only because the most profitable views can provide the greater political bribes.
Kale should taste like bacon. That would solve the kale surplus problem. Next!
If Slashdot were chemistry it would look like this:Cadaverine
Your story was more interesting than this one, if only because it's about an actual event in the real world as opposed to opinions, including mine....
What isn't tested, however, is whether the driver takes you on a joyride,
And people never cheat on something like that.
Just what you want: cars that are identifiably carrying occupants who are likely from out of town and/or have a lot of money. Pickpockets rejoice.
It doesn't look "very strict" to me given my horrible experience with taxi drivers around the world.
"I'm sorry, we're very busy right now, but I can have a taxi pick you up in 90 minutes."
Congestion pricing is far better than the alternative, namely no taxi at any price.
Is that each user JOINS a ride sharing service. Every time a conventional cabbie picks up a fare, he rolls the dice: will this ride be the one that leaves his riddled, bloody body in an alley? Giving rides to people who have subscribed to your service is a huge security advantage.
Taxi's should be Uber?
Did you even read my post? I'm a favor of workers rights. I want all workers treated well. It's that simple. Nice try on the traditional "It's just extra pocket money" crap though. Are you a shill for Uber? You've got their talking points down, and your skill at misdirection is excellent. Seems your talents could be used elsewhere though. The folks that stole the Election from Al Gore would love to have you.
Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
I want _all_ employees to stop being abused. The argument that it's OK for Uber to abuse employees because someone else does it is something like what a toddler says when they're caught stealing cookies. What I don't understand is how the hell an argument this ridiculous is resonating with people.
To be 100% clear, I want _both_ groups to be treated as employees. I want to put an end to the practice employers using the word "Contractor" to get out of the social obligations we have place on them. I don't care if you're Uber, a Taxi company, and IT service company or bloody part runners for an auto shop. If your business depends on those people and you wouldn't have a business without them they're employees. If they work they do is an ongoing part of your business they're employees. If you exercise significant control over their day to day work (how and when) they're employees. Enough with the bs already. If we're going to base 90% of our quality of life on employment then employers don't get to bitch when they're given obligations. Period.
I suppose we could also move to a system of single payer health care, basic income, increased and regulated food prices ( e.g. commodities regulation, not setting the prices at the supermarket, btw. Just wanna head off the "But Communism!" nonsense ), etc, etc. But doing that meaningfully isn't going to happen quickly. If we give up our benefits in exchange for the above the 1%ers will just give us neither of them. That's kinda their thing. What's that old Dilbert joke about saying Yes and then not doing it?
Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
With you daily Uber stories/ads. You suck cock for money. Whores.
There's a class of people whose most profound fear is that, somehow, somewhere, somebody is making a profit.
If they're not a taxi service then drivers should be able to charge what they want without the company dictating the fares, nor have Uber take money from them for each ride.
Uber drivers are free to do exactly that, just not when using Uber's name, infrastructure, and marketing. They have the complete freedom to find their own customers, offer the services they want to offer, and make the price be whatever they want.
though it comes with a long list of "shoulds": "[Cities] should be focusing on making their taxi services better," she writes. "Taxis should be more accessible to everyone. Taxi fares should be low, predictable, and uniform. Taxi geographies should be wide. Taxis should be clean, fuel-efficient, driven by trustworthy, well-trained drivers, and available for frictionless electronic hailing."
And competition is the way to achieve those ends. All those "shoulds" have existed for decades with no action taken. Suddenly Uber arrives on the scene and people are talking about how to address them.
Automation is rapidly replacing them. Foxconn is already starting. They're doing it slowly to prevent social unrest, but they have the tech to replace them all in less than a year. Stephen Hawking just pointed this out during an 'ask me anything' session on twitter if you want to google it.
Capitalism is a complex system. It's not going to break down in one place. Think of it as an airplane where you can loose an engine or two before it crashes. But sooner or later you lose enough engines. The crash is gonna suck for anyone who couldn't afford a private jet.
Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
and if they turn down too many fairs Uber fires them. Also Uber is dependent on them for their ongoing business needs. Uber doesn't have a business without their labor. That makes them employees. Not contractors.
Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
if Uber wins. They can't compete. There are a tonne of regulations they must follow. They're background checks are much more thorough and costly. Their drivers carry much more insurance (as do they). They're legally required to take unprofitable fares. As has been pointed out multiple times Uber externalizes costs that Taxi cab companies face daily.
Also Right now Uber is in growth mode. They're spending investor money. That ends after the Taxi cab companies go away. They'll cut unprofitable routes and fairs. Maybe not directly (they won't want the bad press) but indirectly by either pricing those fairs so high they're not practical for the rider or driver or just plain letting the driver turn them down (btw, today if drivers turn down a lot of fares Uber fires them).
I'll answer your question with my own: If you live in the South, what's stopping you from shopping at an independently owned grocer instead of Walmart?
Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
All these Uber stories are just the same old arguments rehashed over and over again. It's not news anymore, please can we stop getting informed whenever anyone vaguely related to Uber farts?
In NYC I don't have any of these Uber-fixed problems. The problem I have repeatedly:
- I cannot communicate the destination to the driver.
- I attempt to, but the driver gives me no feedback.
- The driver types the address into a GPS from the 90s, distractely while driving, incorrectly, for example confusing S 4th St with 4th St, or 23rd Pl with 23rd Dr. Handing the driver a printout from Google Maps doesn't solve it. Cutting off the address, so the driver has to read the map and can't just type like a monkey, still doesn't solve it.
- The driver cannot find the destination.
- I name a landmark, "Bronx Zoo," and the driver unreasonably says "where's that?"
- The driver attempts to find his own way to the destination by memory and makes many wrong turns. He even turns off the meter apologetically, so he's not trying to scam me, but I'm still late, and it would be avoided by being forced to use a navigation app.
- The driver makes poor decisions about traffic that Waze or even Google Maps would have avoided.
It means, to take a cab and have it actually work, I have to use maps on my phone and give the driver directions. About half the time I can get where I'm going without doing this, but the other half the time there is a major fuckup like wrong turns or going to the wrong place or not knowing where the place is period until I tell him. This is a pain in the ass to do with your friends, because they take everything personally and get hysterical. Doing it with a stranger who is not in German efficiency-mode but is in insecure face-saving third world asia mode quickly becomes the most stressful part of my day.
... they don't care if they compete with anyone. All they care about about is getting their cut or an outrageous fare (during surge pricing) and not having to pay their "driver", who is not their employee any more than possible.
That is exploiting workers, plain and simple.
The taxi industry is structured to screw over drivers as well as the public. Taxi drivers are not protected by Workman's Compensation and wrecks and stick ups are an ongoing problem. In my area the driver rents the cab and keeps what is on the meter. They may not get a single fare in an entire shift and if that cab breaks on the way out of the garage the driver is cheated out of the rental fee. The drivers also pay for the gas. A short four or five mile drive will tend to cost $20. without the tip. That drive may last only five or ten minutes. Drivers are setting minimums such that they refuse any fare under $20.. They also want to charge extra for using a charge card. The industry is a pit of corruption and the rides are absurdly expensive. I have been in other areas where the taxis were wonderful and the rates very low. But in south Florida the government needs to step in big time.
No mention of Uber tracking you wherever you go with it's app on your phone?
Comment removed based on user account deletion
Look, you're holding the two - Uber and Taxi companies, to different standards.
Uber's approach is quite simple. Drop below a 4.3 or so out of 5 stars rating, and Uber stops offering you fares. If you're a taxi driver and a customer calls central about you, odds are you'll never hear about it, nor be affected.
One of the common things about Uber reviews - from people using the service, is that Uber drivers are much nicer and cleaner than taxi drivers. Ergo, Uber's filter system works. If you get a surly uber driver, odds are they're either new or having a really bad day. Cab drivers, meanwhile, can be that way every day.
I don't read AC A human right
Check here. Didn't take long to find it either. That said, Uber doesn't explicitly 'fire' folks any more. But then again neither did the fast food place I worked at as a kid. Just cut your hours/pay until you're basically fired. There's other nastiness they do, but you'll have to google to get the specifics.
Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
Surge pricing is incredibly predictable. You know if you want an uber at prime time it will be expensive, at others times it will not.
FURTHERMORE, the app gives you an estimate if you want before you ever even order the car. With a taxi you have to hail them and ask how much... EVEN WHEN there are supposed posted rates which they are supposed to charge.
It's also quite uniform in that Uber doesn't change your fare based on race or skin color or gender, as cabs can and will.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
Yes yes yes! This sums it up for me. I hate taxis who have one job to drive me somewhere and can't even do that. It's shocking how bad taxis are. I'll be taking uber whenever I can.
With you daily Uber stories/ads. You suck cock for money. Whores.
There's a class of people whose most profound fear is that, somehow, somewhere, somebody is making a profit.
Making a profit without paying tax on it. That class of people that are afraid of it are the class of people that are running governments, whether we like it or not.
Uber is a "fuck you, we are taking over and taking all the money" sort of bunch, which should be kept in mind even if those that they are displacing are as bad or worse.
That sort of idea of offering exclusive rights to offering a service dates back to King John is not earlier. Those governing make money out of it and those who buy the rights have a barrier to keep competitors out. I'm not defending it just framing the issue and pointing out why those that have paid to be inside the barrier are pissed off by others that do not have to wear the same costs.
Near where I am Uber has just refused a compromise deal where they have to pay tax - the same goods and services tax that every other company in the country has to pay on transactions. They seem determined to remain outside the law and just influence those in power to look the other way.
Why stop at that? Go to those disaster areas and loot - if the owners are dead you are not hurting anyone. Why travel when you can graverob at home instead? Your "it's OK to exploit people who can't find easy alternatives" may be what you see as "the American way" but only from the most amoral of the bunch in "Deadwood".
So, in other words, *Uber drivers* are not free to do any of that.
People should walk, ride a bike, ride a bus, or buy their own car. Taxis, Uber, Lyft, are for selfish/lazy people, and create more pollution than necessary.
I deal with a reputable taxi company in Auckland. They do the job well. They have a large fleet. Why would I want to take a chance on unregulated randos? I guess if you have poor taxis where you live some guy in his car would possibly be better.
Only boring people are ever bored.
Anyone who has driven an area for more than a week KNOWS WHERE SHIT IS, including a monkey.
I live in an area where you call a taxi service, you don't hail them on the streets. You call, they say they will be there in 10 minutes. 15 minutes later you call, they say they're on their way. 20 minutes later, still on their way. Often they never come. I used to call 3 or 4 companies and take the first car that arrived. That could be one reason the cars are tied up, since I assume others are doing the same thing. The system is broken.
I switched to Uber because there is 1:1 correlation between the passenger and the driver. The wait may be more than 10 minutes (and often less) but I can track the driver's approach. It's a disruptive technology that addresses the broken system.
Most of my adult life (42) taxis have been the transportation of regrettable last resort. I discovered uber and lyft almost 2 yrs ago while living in SF. I use them now frequently and without hesitation. All the rest is an irrelevant distraction from the fact that the services are a free-market value where time and again taxis a regulated hustle. Taxis driver doesn't like the area, you don't get a taxi. Taxi drivers don't like commuter flow this time of day, you don't get a taxi. Taxi driver doesn't want to take a CC, you don't get a taxi. Taxi driver expects a tip on top of so called 'regulated' fairs... It's a bullshit hustle. I am fully happy for the taxi industry to die die die forever. The proof that uber works isn't that it is taking market share away from taxis, it's that it creates a market where it wouldn't otherwise exist. Most of the market for this style of transportation is untapped because the customer experience of taxis is fucked up. So, I don't give a shit what the taxi industry says, and when I hear that whore beauricrates are running their paid face holes to protect that market, it just makes me hate those grifting two steps above organized crime crony bastards more. Fuck Taxis.
That sort of control is what an employer gets, not an informational based contracting service that only seeks to link buyers and sellers. If I want to sell something on ebay I put my price up. If I decide to keep my item because nobody will pay my price then Ebay doesn't get to tell me to sell it for less just because they want their cut of the fees. Uber sets the price. They also exercise control over your choice to accept working for that price. That's what we have traditionally called 'employment'...
Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/