Slashdot Mirror
Bay Area Cities Consider Rideshare Tax On Uber, Lyft (arstechnica.com)
An anonymous reader quotes a report from Ars Technica: A local city council member is beginning to float the idea of taxing ridehailing companies like Uber and Lyft as a possible way to raise millions of dollars and help pay for local public transportation and infrastructure improvements. If the effort is successful, Oakland could become the first city in California -- Uber and Lyft's home state -- to impose such a tax. However, it's not clear whether Oakland or any other city in the Golden State has the authority to do so under current state rules. Councilwoman Rebecca Kaplan told the East Bay Express that she wants the city council to put forward a ballot measure that would tax such rides. A similar proposal in nearby San Francisco, projecting a fee of $0.20 to $1 per ride, would allow the city to collect an estimated $12.5 to $62.5 million annually. However, an October 2017 city analysis noted that San Francisco "cannot initiate locally without state authorizing legislation" and that the fee "may disproportionately impact lower-income households."
Don't tax me, brah
Try to beat the taxi tax eh? How about a taxi-beater tax? Oh yeah, you flaunted it and now you get it.
Why not just regulate and tax them as taxi services... since they *are* taxi services? I understand times change, but Uber and Lyft are really no different than taxis, other than the drivers get paid shit.
I don't respond to AC's.
Mass transit should be able to pay for itself via the tolls paid by its users; you shouldn't have to tax people who choose not to use mass transit to pay costs for people that do. If I want to hire an Uber to drive around Oakland empty all day that should be my right and I shouldn't have to pay for some idiot to catch a train to his job at Subway by doing that.
Please rise up against your oppressors, sincerely, Texas.
"Why do you rob the banks?"
"Because that's where the money is."
Tax them to fund public transport? Why? The public already pays for public transport through existing taxation and ticket sales. When will the left learn that the public wants better use of existing revenue streams? If they can't even compete on open terms with half-assed private ride sharing that has crazy price fluctuations, then they deserve to fail.
Which means you have to book in advance - no street hailing - but totally matches the Uber ride style. It seems to work for us.
This is nuts; unless you are proposing to tax all private car usage, this is encouraging people to stay in THEIR cars.
Taxi drivers are paid less than uber drivers, especially in San Francisco, the area in question (Uber drivers make about $23.87/hour, compared to $12.96 for taxi drivers).
Part of that is the regulations, so I guess you want poor people to earn even less money by making sure Uber drivers are paid as poorly. Please justify your inherently asshole position to the rest of the world.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
The Uber and Lyft drivers already pay taxes on gasoline as well as tolls, which are supposed to go towards infrastructure improvements, so this is clearly double-taxing.
Just what the Bay Area needs, more cars on the road.
This is fucking crazy..
California is allready the most expensive place to live..
Weed is taxed at %35
Income tax is high
They have they lottery
state taxers are high
local taxes are high
companies are leaving
some faggot fuckers out there..
Articles are comming out about how California is the most family unfriendliest place to be?
They charge Rent on top of normal rent if you have a pet.. Example.. your one bedroom Cramped 20yrs old apt is about $3500/month. If you have a cat, that number goes to $4000 a month plus an extra deposit fee.. which accrues 10%+ year over year. fucking crazy..
All you millennial fuckers did this.. No forward thinking, only your selves.. Lie, cheat, steal. :(
The carpet bagers came to California, over developoed it, Raped it, Beat it down, robed it, then ran away from it and now those whom are stuck and cant get out, are now stuck with the smoldering pile.
I cant wait until the day when every thign HAS TO BE AUTOMATED. in order to survive.
Example manager of a mc donnalds. How the fuck do you expect them to live on their own? at 15$/hr in CA thats impossible..
Jerry fucking Brown, california, YOUR ALL FUCKED!
Mandatory GPS monitors so they can institute a per mile tax on top of the gas and DMV taxes. Making car pool lanes toll lanes. Raising parking prices. It goes on and on.
minimum wage & employment laws. People died for the 40 hour work week. The 'gig' economy chips away at those protections with a pickaxe. Also, what good does it do to tax them if the money goes right out the door in low income benefits? I'm not saying we pull the benefits, I'm saying we don't let them pay like crap.
Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
Lets make ridesharing less profitable to drivers who aren't even clearing minimum wage while destroying the capital value of the most expensive thing they own, while making those rides more expensive for people who ride in them. So the government has more money to blow.
Woo hoo!
[ X ] If it moves, tax it, O Voracious Spenders To Buy Votes
If you have a better explanation, let me know. I used a poetic O because srius stuff.
(-1: Post disagrees with my already-settled worldview) is not a valid mod option.
People don't like when others skirt the law for profit. It's not being an asshole to the uber drivers so much as empathy for the taxi drivers.
You have to cite your reference if you're going to claim Uber drivers make $23.87 an hour. Unless you mean before insurance, wear and tear and maintenance to the vehicle that only comes after a few years.
Laws are rules for the court, but merely a bottom bar to hit for life. Think beyond laws in your actions always.
Suppose that a large city eliminates 10,000 cars in the hands of the public because those 10,000 drivers have switched to Uber. That is 10,000 less cars parking, causing traffic jambs. A city can have numerous benefits by the use of Uber. Matter of fact we could even have cities that allow only services like Uber to be on the roads. The savings would be astounding. There is even an effect on ambulance services as many people who need to get to a hospital use Uber instead of an ambulance. Also one would expect trivial driving to drop off as well. People will not tend to take a two hour cruise when they need to pay on the spot. It would even have an effect on very local businesses as people will not want to cough up big bucks to travel 30 miles to eat at some Italian eatery. Less pollution, elimination of parking issues and so much more can be had bu Uber usage. And when a human driver is no longer required the price of Uber rides should drop quite a bit. already it is cheaper to use Uber than drive in some areas. Run towards the future rather than trying to freeze progress!
Instead of finding ways to support the hiring of locals by helping Uber/Lyft expand, they'd rather tax them out of existence in an effort to spend millions on mass transit systems which nobody will use even if, by some miracle, they're ever actually built.
Uber is not a tech story. Uber is a taxi service. It's one step up from home pizza delivery.
mass transit systems which nobody will use even if, by some miracle, they're ever actually built.
and yet mass transit usage numbers are at their highest numbers later, and would be even higher if there were more capacity
Government can be summarized in a few phrases. If it moves tax it. If it still moves regulate it. If it stops moving subsidize it.
You have to cite your reference if you're going to claim Uber drivers make $23.87 an hour.
You mean like the fucking LINK THAT I POSTED that links to the study that provides that number?
You mean THAT reference? Oh! Do you even internet bro?
Retard.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
People don't like when others skirt the law for profit.
Wow, what world do YOU live in? People kind of LOVE THAT.
It's not being an asshole to the uber drivers so much as empathy for the taxi drivers.
Why would you have sympathy for assholes?
It's not like taxi drivers own the license they are working under. Some rich dude who never has to drive anywhere owns that. He just hires surly cheap drivers to operate the license..
I do not feel sorry for any of them - not the rich guy with the license, not the exploited taxi drivers. Why? Because now those poor taxi drivers can drive for Uber, it's given them a real option for mobility in a way they did not have before when you had to work for a taxi company. I've met MANY Uber drivers who either were also taxi drivers or still drove them but added income with Uber.
The horrific taxis drivers that are horrible human beings might find that hard. But may I suggest, they should find some line of work that keeps them away from people. It used to be as a customer for transportation you had no way to avoid such losers because you took what the taxi company gave you. Now they have to provide actual customer service, and damned if we are not all better off for that.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
There will be a tax. California is all about the tax.
I mean that's what that was for right? I have absolutely no idea what they're spending the tax tax money on, or the Federal highway money for that matter. The roads are congested, overpasses are crumbling, and none of it is getting any better. Now they want to tax something else in the name of "roads" when we've seen nothing in the way of road improvements in over 20 years. No, I'm sorry, I don't buy the "it's for the improvements" story anymore. If they make a law where ALL that tax money has to go toward improvements while administrative overhead has to be paid from the general fund, then we can talk.
It will form an exploratory commission to evaluate the potential for a new union led city service for the cleaning of the used needs and piles of feces lining the streets and new offering needle dispensing kiosks and porta jons on every corner.
If the aim is to reduce traffic you want to get those who can afford to drive by cars to use mass transit. The only way to do that is make sure mass transit is not crowded with the poor. The market economy solution for that is to charge more so the poor dont use mass transit.
You solve your traffic issues as well as make mass transit self funding.
Once mass transit is self funding it can expand. As it expands it will become more and more cheaper due to economies of scale till at some point the poor can afford to use it and the price will still be a profit making one.
What about the poor's transportation needs during the transition phase. Thats what Uber is for. Let the poor use Uber. After all their the subsidy is being paid by VCs not the general taxpayer.
**Life is too short to be serious**
Well other than the one he provided, tey reading the goddamn news. MIT just admitted they published a bullshit study and that Uber drivers actually do average around $23/hr.
Before they rush to raise funds...
The should run a pilot program with highly experimental, 20-years-down-the-road technology.
Implementing public transportation Which Does Not Suck(tm).
You know: something new, and never seen before.
Assuming they are successful, then they should come to us (the public) for funding.
P.S.: How's that whole "high speed rail" thing working out for you? You got your funding; where's our results?
Uh, no they didn't, they said that the $3 figure was incorrect and that, when they corrected it, they found that the median profit was $8.55 per hour, rather than $3.37, and only 8% of drivers lose money on on-demand platforms. Using another methodology, he added, the median rises to $10 per hour and only 4% of drivers lose money. Oh, and Uber's initial complaint argued that their drivers average hour earnings were $15.68, not the $23/hr that you claim.
I am TheRaven on Soylent News
Remember all of those bonds and taxes you voted to approve previously to cover road and infrastructure improvements? Sorry, the politicians needed new carpeting in their offices and wanted to plant some palm trees along the route they drive to work. Be sure to re-elect them as you always do!
-==- Buy a Mac and leave me alone!
And the counsel shot it down. And Cleveland is as liberal as any city. Myself, I pay taxes(local/state/federal) to support Mass transportation. Have no problem with it either. Do NOT double tax me because I want to use an Uber or Lyft because the Mass Transportation sucks. If the mass transportation can not compete, then let it die. Or fix it so it can compete.
Anonymous comments are as pathetic as the anonymous "sources" that contaminate gutless journalism from the New York Time
How can this not be obvious? At best it is a chauffeur service, maybe an upscale taxi.