There’s a lot that’s right and a lot that’s wrong with Ezra Klein’s chapter-length post on productivity—“Technology is changing how we live, but it needs to change how we work”—and I hope to respond to his larger thesis as soon as I have the time. But I just have to take a quick moment to call out Klein for this almost-parenthetical assertion:
Uber’s great innovation wasn’t its software so much as its brazenness at exploiting loopholes in taxi regulations and then mobilizing satisfied customers to scare off powerful interest groups and angry local politicians.
Um… no. Uber’s great innovation wasn’t in brazenly “exploiting loopholes.” It was in brazenly breaking the law. In Seattle and in hundreds of other cities worldwide, it was unambiguously illegal to pick up paying passengers without a for-hire license. This wasn’t a “loophole” that UberX and Lyft drove through; it was the rule of law.
And that’s a very important distinction. “Exploiting a loophole,” implies some sort of clever, even sneaky, but technically legal circumvention of existing laws and regulations. But that’s not what Uber did. Rather, in city after city, Uber brazenly defied the law until lawmakers caved and changed it.
Uber wasn’t being clever. It was being anti-social.
Of course, you’ll rarely read such a blunt (and accurate) description of Uber’s practices in the corporate media (and yes, Vox too is a corporation), perhaps because Uber was equally brazen at threatening its critics in the press. But, well, the truth matters, and it’s always galled me to see Uber lionized as a great innovator when its greatest business innovation was arguably its utter disregard for the law.
Good for Uber!
Toyota and Uber Reach Investment, Lease Partnership
http://www.wsj.com/articles/to.....1464122403
Yeah, the last thing we want is more hybrids on the road. Support your local medallion. A twelve year old Crown Victoria will be by any hour now.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=axSnW-ygU5g
Probably wasn’t legal to smash that video screen, either.
Think about all of those productive immigrants who unambiguously illegally entered this country. And put white dudes who voted GOP out of work. And now, or sometime soon, can vote as Democrats.
So when are they going to start arresting the drivers and towing their cars?
Thats what they do in NYC and Chicago when they find an unlicensed hack working. It’s a serious fine and a few months in jail.
The issue is, that there is a specific set of practices associated with how cab drivers get hired, and it serves to limit the number of hacks on the road for a specific reason. That being the memory of the “good ol’ days” when there were so many taxi drivers that it ended up being a major aspect and source of revenue for organized crime. one could be the most honest, hard working unlicensed cabbie in the city, but when the Guidos came around looking for a cut, one had better have it on the spot or someone was going to get a foot smashed with a hammer at the least. There were gunfights, cars being vandalized, people got killed over this. It was a major aspect of the Mafia cash machine.
That is but a single reason. There are many others.
The laws creating system as it exists now had, and still have some excellent rationales behind them.
For the Republicans in here, that means that there are some very good reasons for the laws being passed and the Police being involved. There’s a reason why it is worth six months in Rikers and as much as a $10,000 fine.
But, whatever it is you guys are going to say in here is guaranteed to be a lie anyway, so whats the point of spelling it out for you? You’re too stupid and lazy to see how transparently (that means see-through) your bullshit stands out.
@4 “Think about all of those productive immigrants who unambiguously illegally entered this country. And put white dudes who voted GOP out of work.”
At long last, I finally understand Trumpism! Trump’s supporters are upset at being displaced from their unskilled $2-a-day jobs. I guess I would be, too, if all I had was a job that a non-English-speaking illegal immigrant could take away from me. Thank God my parents made me complete 6th grade (and then some) so I wouldn’t have that problem.
If you’re big and powerful enough, you can do anything you want, as anyone who’s ever tried to stop a Trump golf course development knows.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/You%27ve_Been_Trumped
Of course, there’s often a price to be paid for being a bully.
http://mashable.com/2015/12/11.....IFzlial8qo
But a substantial portion of America’s electorate seems to want a bully in charge right now. I’ve heard that Putin is popular in his country, too.
I have limited expectations of you stupid humans.
@ 6
Thank God my parents made me complete 6th grade (and then some) so I wouldn’t have that problem.
Thank the NEA that your teachers moved you through without making you learn a fucking thing while you were there.
From the degreed “dumbfuck” who put its faith in “unskewed polls”..
@10 and who has been wrong about virtually everything he has ever said.
So you chose to follow in Travis’ footsteps HHTL@11? You are more wrong than Travis will ever be!
Apparently most HA DUMMOCRETINS have never been a city taxi!
At long last, I finally understand Trumpism! Trump’s supporters are upset at being displaced from their unskilled $2-a-day jobs.
White taxi drivers? When has a HA DUMMOCRETIN seen one of them lately in Seattle except from Eastern European countries? And they would vote for Trump?
Another example of senility in R senile! Seems to be getting geometrically worse each day!
But this is the Sharing economy. I’m not selling rides like those awful yellow taxis, I’m Sharing my car with someone of my choosing. Why should I have to comply with all those old-fashioned laws designed for another era? I’m special, so let me do things my way.
@9 I see what you did there, attacking the other person’s character.
“…ad hominem attacks, in which an argument is rejected, based on a personal characteristic of an individual rather than on reasons for or against the claim itself. Putting the focus on the arguer or person being discussed can distract us from the issues that matter.”
Since you offer no valid arguments to #4 and tried to distract by insult, you cannot think of a valid alternative to the proposition that Trump’s supporters are wrongly blaming brown people for being displaced from their unskilled jobs and they lack the education that rabbit has to get anything better.
“When the debate is lost, slander becomes the tool of the loser.”
@ 16
Um, Better, dear?
That # 4 to which you refer? That was my argument. See my name at the top? Means I wrote it.
What I was pointing out is sometimes, doing things either skirting or in violation of law might be justified if the ultimate outcome betters society.
Illegal immigrants coming to the US to work, helping to give us lower-cost fresh food, for instance.
It probably wasn’t legal, at the time, to dump tea in Boston Harbor. And yet here we are, free from tyranny, ’cause some dudes caused some property damage a couple of hundred years back.
If Seattle ends up with fewer cars on the road and cheaper, cleaner, and more easily accessible door-to-door transportation due to the efforts of Uber and Lyft, why is that a bad thing, Better?
Because some cabbies might end up without jobs or medallion owners might end up owning worthless metal? Better, there will be losers when the minimum wage is increased, right? That Corporate Lie thing and all? You’re OK with some jobless people and closed businesses subsequent to a minimum wage increase that makes society better overall, as the argument goes, right? So why be sad if the current cab system becomes obsolete but is replaced by something measurably….
….wait for it…
…. better, Better?
@ 16
Um, Better, dear?
That # 4 to which you refer? That was my argument. See my name at the top? Means I wrote it.
What I was pointing out is sometimes, doing things either skirting or in violation of law might be justified if the ultimate outcome betters society.
Illegal immigrants coming to the US to work, helping to give us lower-cost fresh food, for instance.
It probably wasn’t legal, at the time, to dump tea in Boston Harbor. And yet here we are, free from tyranny, ’cause some dudes caused some property damage a couple of hundred years back.
If Seattle ends up with fewer cars on the road and cheaper, cleaner, and more easily accessible door-to-door transportation due to the efforts of Uber and Lyft, why is that a bad thing, Better?
Because some cabbies might end up without jobs or medallion owners might end up owning worthless metal? Better, there will be losers when the minimum wage is increased, right? That Corporate Lie thing and all? You’re OK with some jobless people and closed businesses subsequent to a minimum wage increase that makes society better overall, as the argument goes, right? So why be sad if the current cab system becomes obsolete but is replaced by something measurably….
….wait for it…
…. better, Better?
“…ad hominem attacks, in which an argument is rejected, based on a personal characteristic of an individual rather than on reasons for or against the claim itself. Putting the focus on the arguer or person being discussed can distract us from the issues that matter.”
Is what most HA DUMMOCRETINS do every day in ever thread. The topic is Uber and what are the offered responses. Attack the conservative!
@7 So….any bets on which band is going to become the Yankee version of Pussy Riot?
Yay! In the “sharing economy” me and my alcoholic brother-in-law are going to build your new second story home addition without plans, permits, inspections, or even contractor’s licenses. Why? Because those things just stifle innovation. We’ll employ a whole bunch of techniques and materials we learned about two days ago watching YouTube videos. So that’s just super innovative. And we have a creative and innovative idea for a spiral staircase made out of old wire spools and wine barrels. Your friends will just die from envy. Then in two years a couple of firefighters will just die from smoke inhalation when, trapped on our groovy spiral staircase, they have to ditch their air bottles.
Oh well. Nobody said innovation was free.
Yay! In the “sharing economy” me and my other alcoholic brother-in-law are going to do all the lab tests and diagnostic services for your doctors and surgeons without any permits, training, licenses, or even much in the way of related edyookayshun. ‘Cause patriotism, and tea parties, and fuck you stuck up intellectual elites andFREEEEEEEDUUUUM!!!!!
@ 21
That might make sense if the number of contractor’s licenses was anywhere near the number of driver’s licenses.
We let teenagers drive with cars full of our children, and nary a care in the world in most cases. Why so much greater concern if an adult, with significantly more driving experience, is doing it for pay?
“Sometimes, doing things either skirting or in violation of law might be justified if the ultimate outcome betters society.”
-Edward Snowden
@23,
” …doing it for pay?”
Answered.
I cited 4 ? Meant 9 where you attacked rabbit’s education. My mistake.
http://si-news.com/iphone-manu.....ith-robots
Sloppy should enjoy this, 60,000 humans to be replaced by robots. Cause Chinese workers apparently are paid too much.
Uber is exploring automated cars.
What is society going to do when automation disrupts the economy? How will we deal with the humans who cannot find a job?
@ 21. “That might make sense if the number of contractor’s licenses was anywhere near the number of driver’s licenses.”
That’s the point. Be like uber. Flood the market with “freelancers” who don’t have to follow any regulations.
The uber model makes it better for whom? Uber makes good money. Riders pay a little less. Workers make less and have no benefits and assume most of the risks.
Do you see it as better because it doesn’t hurt you?
@29,
I’d suggest that riders assume most of the risk.
As it stands in most places these drivers are operating an unlicensed business with almost none of the insurance required in our legal system. And most riders are unaware.
I was talking to a man who started working at 14. He feels he earned everything he has, and his taxes are too high for what he gets in return.
He sees anyone working at McDonalds and McJobs as lazy and or not having ambition and so they are deserving of the low wages they get and undeserving of any charity the government gives them.
@30. Never thought of it that way. I can only assume the riders assume that bad things will never happen. to. them.
And if they did, the driver’s insurance or Uber would pay.
@ 30,32
Neither the “workers” (so far, mostly still classified as independent contractors) nor the customers of the service are forced to affiliate themselves with a ride-sharing service.
The drivers are free not to have that second job, to work as a cabbie, or to work at McDonalds, instead of driving for Uber/Lyft. And the customers are free to wait – and wait longer – for a traditional cab.
Neither choose those other options, do they?
@33. The buyer beware argument? If anything bad happens to you, sucks to be you argument?
Found this passage skimming for “Caveat Emptor”
“Today, most sales in the U.S. fall under the principle of caveat venditor, which means “let the seller beware,” by which goods are covered by an implied warranty of merchantability. Unless otherwise advertised (for example, “sold as is”) or negotiated with the buyer, nearly all consumer products are guaranteed to work if used for their intended purpose.” – See more at: http://consumer.findlaw.com/co.....hFN3W.dpuf
The problem I see is, do riders assume there is a implied warranty of merchantability, of safety and security of their ride like you would get in a taxi? And is it just just libertarians and Uber lawyers who cleve to the letter of the law, not the spirit and claim it does not if there is a problem?
@32,
in terms of liability among private parties acting in their personal capacity a motorists insurance would probably pay. But once you venture into business, things can get very complicated, very quickly. Obviously in the case of any Uber “independent contractor” without the correct type of liability coverage the insurer will not pay. I understand Uber makes commercial motor vehicle liability available to its “independent contractors” but I’m not aware of that being a requirement or of any mechanism to ensure that policies remain in effect. Lot’s of defects in performance can invalidate a commercial liability policy. Failing to obtain relevant licenses and other forms of coverage may leave them uncovered.
Insurers deal very differently with small independent business people compared to large companies. A sketchy Uber driver with small annual receipts and brief business history offers little in the way of incentive to a big insurance company to extend coverage beyond the strict terms of the policy contract. And those terms can be very limited indeed.
If I lived in an area with lots of Uber “independent contractors” I’d make damn sure my uninsured motorist policy was paid up and I’d look both ways carefully before crossing the street. I strongly suspect that more than a few of these folks are operating without real coverage.
@35,
I think without a doubt that rideshare riders absolutely assume there is at least the same warranty of safety and security as getting into a corporate owned taxi or other licensed for-hire. Uber and the other ride-share operators spend a lot of money on creating that impression among customers and potential customers. They spend very little on follow through. Based on dozens of conversations with all kinds of regular Uber users I’ve never once encountered a user who either fully understood the commercial liability issues, or had even considered them. Every single regular Uber user I’ve ever talked to about it assumed that insurance was in place and that they could rely on it. And they tended to dismiss the concerns regardless of the evidence. Passenger vehicles are much safer than they’ve ever been. But people still go to emergency rooms with major trauma from automobile accidents. ER care is very expensive. Recovery from lower limb fractures and blunt force trauma is very expensive. Loss of income is very expensive. And it always happens to someone else until it happens to you. The glib assumption that ride-share “independent contractors” are no more dangerous than any other motor vehicle operator doesn’t allay such concerns.
@36. I suppose it will take a time of death, dismemberment and bankruptcy before enough people make their legislators pass regulations making Uber companies follow the rules like all the companies before them.
@33,
and Brianne Kiner was free to choose fish and chips instead of hamburgers.
So fuck her, right?
@38
Uber appears to have a policy, at least during the startup and growth phase of their operations, to “disappear” such incidents by tying up their “independent contractors” with non-disclosure, and sweeping away plaintiffs with rapid settlement, sealed agreements, and gag orders. One or two decent independent investigations by journalists have made it through the smoke screen to be met mostly by yawns.
I wouldn’t argue that ride-share operators should be regulated exactly the same as other for-hire operators. And there’s already plenty of precedent for that. Town cars, limousines, and van operators are often regulated very differently from taxis. And at least some of those existing regulations are obviously intended to limit competition. But I don’t really think it makes any sense at all to argue that ride-share companies should be free of all regulation. Things like legitimate background checks, proper business licensing, and verified mandatory minimum insurance seems very reasonable. For example, in most jurisdictions building contractors who allow their insurance to lapse pay hefty penalties and are not allowed to re-license their business for a period of several years. That system works very well.
Jumping through all the hoops to be licensed even if your a gypsy driver is not cheap.
Of course if you give your friend a ride home from the bar and they happen to give you $10 for gas you have just broken the same law all the Uber drivers are possible breaking.
Of course the cab situation in Seattle could be a case where Capitalism is failing to meet the needs of society and consumers.
Then again why are there cabs in the Socialist Peoples Republic of Seattle. Why are the workers not simply picking up their fellow workers and giving them rides as needed at no coast to their brother workers. Arise WONNLIES of Seattle to your potential! There should be perfect public transportation within the Workers paradise of Seattle. Workers should of course walk when possible.
If your boss sends you to the airport to pick up an arrival and then drive them back to your workplace aren’t you being a cabbie or stealing from a cabbie and his family?
Taxis are really about class. It’s also how most cab companies operate. They serve the rich and powerful and those able to afford a ride. They don’t serve the city evenly. They want their drivers to go from the airport to the central business district and then pick up another fair there maybe out to the moneyed part of town. Woe be to the poor cabbie who has to take a fare out to Bothell. Doomed to not have a return fare.