How is "Über" Fair?

[Ramone45]

I don't know much about Über, but how is it fair to traditional taxi services. The regulations of taxis are strict. Medallions can cost hundreds of thousands of dollars in addition to permit fees. So, again, how is it fair, irrespective of your opinion of the quality of the service?

 

[SgtSpiderMan]

I don't know much about Über, but how is it fair to traditional taxi services. The regulations of taxis are strict. Medallions can cost hundreds of thousands of dollars in addition to permit fees. So, again, how is it fair, irrespective of your opinion of the quality of the service?

It's not fair to any business that has gone through the legal process of setting up a business.

 

[Ramone45]

It's not fair to any business that has gone through the legal process of setting up a business.

That's how it seems to me, and it's worrisome. Maybe we can agree that the regulations on certain businesses are onerous, but completely subverting the process is not the answer.

 

[Yardley]

Your premise is wrong.

How is the government deciding who is and who is not able to contract with a willing purchaser of their services and charging exorbitant fees for this "privilege" fair?

Just as eBay and BitCoin have enabled people to build reputations and provide data for buyers of goods and services to make informed choices, a system like Uber can do much better than some civil servant stamping a license saying that the recipient paid a bunch of money that he doesn't want to risk by giving bad service.

The era of consumers giving a shit about the imprimatur of government oversight is over.

 

[Ramone45]

Your premise is wrong.

How is the government deciding who is and who is not able to contract with a willing purchaser of their services and charging exorbitant fees for this "privilege" fair?

Just as eBay and BitCoin have enabled people to build reputations and provide data for buyers of goods and services to make informed choices, a system like Uber can do much better than some civil servant stamping a license saying that the recipient paid a bunch of money that he doesn't want to risk by giving bad service.

The era of consumers giving a shit about the imprimatur of government oversight is over.

Hmmm! There is a need for some degree of oversight and regulation in order to ensure safety and quality. Many medical procedures are pretty simple in reality. Where is this movement going?

 

[Ramone45]

Sort of reminds me of illegal immigration. The process is deemed to be too difficult, so just ignore the rules and do it anyway.

 

[selimiles]

Any time an industry has been moving steady in the same direction or perhaps hasn't moved at all, it's the job of 'the market' (existing or new players) to come in and shake things up.

Uber is clearly solving a problem that has a demand and nothing is stopping cab drivers and unions to unite and launch it's own app.

I'm not supporting Uber, but instead of fighting change and going for a status quo, why not use this time of disequilibrium to define what the cab industry has that Uber doesn't have and see if there is a demand for their (new) value proposition.

A side note: I think the increased value of the medallion is part of the situation the cab sector got itself into. It creates a barrier to entry for new drivers and doesn't allow the market to self regulate since people would also protest if they would double the amount of medallion, as it would decrease the value of a single medallion. This is something separate from the Uber variable in all this.

 

[SgtSpiderMan]

Any time an industry has been moving steady in the same direction or perhaps hasn't moved at all, it's the job of 'the market' (existing or new players) to come in and shake things up.

Uber is clearly solving a problem that has a demand and nothing is stopping cab drivers and unions to unite and launch it's own app.

I'm not supporting Uber, but instead of fighting change and going for a status quo, why not use this time of disequilibrium to define what the cab industry has that Uber doesn't have and see if there is a demand for their (new) value proposition.

A side note: I think the increased value of the medallion is part of the situation the cab sector got itself into. It creates a barrier to entry for new drivers and doesn't allow the market to self regulate since people would also protest if they would double the amount of medallion, as it would decrease the value of a single medallion. This is something separate from the Uber variable in all this.

I don't think anyone would argue with you that the cab industry had become stagnant.

The issue here seems to be when a new player comes into an industry, is it OK for them to come in breaking the rules.

 

[Yardley]

Hmmm! There is a need for some degree of oversight and regulation in order to ensure safety and quality. Many medical procedures are pretty simple in reality. Where is this movement going?

City, County, State governments are all out of money. They simply take in the fees such licenses generate and perform little to no oversight unless and until someone files a complaint, at which time, of course the consumer is already harmed. The Feds have plenty of borrowed money, so they tend to gum up the works with vague fishing exhibitions. They also duplicate state functions. Such as workplace safety inspections and environmental audits.

The government never was needed for this function. Consumers always had the ability to determine whether a product or service is safe or as advertised or effective.

The biggest protector of consumers in America is Underwriters Laboratories. It is a private company. You cannot bribe them to look the other way. You cannot slip through the cracks because the government gave you a manufacturing license in 1957. You have to submit every product to them for actual testing, and if their actual technologists do not find that your string of christmas tree lights is safe, you do not get to put the "UL approved" label on it.

Any other product of service can work this way. States did not always license every sort of profession. A CPA was a professional organization run by accountants that actually looked at your work and certified that you new what the hell you were doing, or you didn't get to claim you belonged to that certifying body. Same with insurance professionals, financial planners, lawyers, realtors, appraisers, and mortgage brokers. Now, you pay a few hundred dollars a year to the state and the consumer gets a place to file complaint forms. Anyone with minimal competency that cannot meet the higher standards of the professional organizations can get a "license" from the state. They are meaningless.

I read an article about a woman that braids hair. She sounds like she was perhaps a bit simple, possibly disabled in some way. She had customers that loved her work. She got into trouble in her state because she doesn't have a "cosmetology license." She has to pay money, go to school, learn about haircuts, color, and who knows what else. She only wants to braid hair. They don't have a license for that. Why does she need a license?

I don't think there are grass-cutting or dog walking licenses, but I am sure some revenue seeking politician has thought of it.

In a world with no oversight by a government agency would con men and incompetent flourish? No more than they do now, but you can complain about them in triplicate and maybe get some money back from a state recovery fund.

If you knew there was no state recover fund for builders, wouldn't you pay a little more attention while they were building your house? Maybe pay a modest fee (usually around $200-$500 for an independent building inspector to look over the work before you accept the keys.

 

[someoneyouknow]

A) Uber is a taxi company, pure and simple. They are not a "ride sharing" company because the drivers are not just happening to be going the same place the rider is. The rider makes a conscious decision to call the company and request to be picked up. That is not sharing.

B) The reason for regulation in the taxi industry is because if there were no or almost no regulation you would literally have situations where competing firms, or people, would be racing to pick someone up when the call came in, thus endangering those around them.

Further, through regulation, companies cannot say, "We don't service that area." They must go to where the ride is being requested with few exceptions.

C) Contrary to what Uber claims, they do not perform due diligence on their drivers. There are numerous stories where someone gets picked up (again, not sharing) and the picture of the driver does not match the person driving. I remember one case where the driver admitted it was his brother's Uber account but he didn't want to do the driving. This then defeats the whole purpose of accountability. At least with a taxi company you have someone to go back to if you have a complaint.

D) There was an article not too long ago talking about how to get good ratings from Uber drivers and one of the ways was to give them good tips. Um, what? Their job is to pick you up (again, not sharing) and deliver to your destination. If this were a "ride sharing" event you would compensate the person for their gas and that's it. Instead, not only are you paying them for the gas used, but also an additional amount for them to earn a profit on the ride AND a tip on top. Explain how that is not a taxi business.

E) Using eBay is not a good example when talking about changing the dynamics of a system. eBay, and PayPal, must still adhere to some banking regulations, accountability regulations and business regulations. What Uber is saying is, "Nope, we're completely different. Even though people call us to be picked up, we're not a taxi company and so shouldn't be regulated as one."

Which is of course BS as shown above.

People like to think that Net makes things different. No, it doesn't. It might change, to a limited extent, how something is done, but it's still doing the same thing as those who came before it. You think Amazon isn't regulated like a business?

 

[Ramone45]

A) Uber is a taxi company, pure and simple. They are not a "ride sharing" company because the drivers are not just happening to be going the same place the rider is. The rider makes a conscious decision to call the company and request to be picked up. That is not sharing.

B) The reason for regulation in the taxi industry is because if there were no or almost no regulation you would literally have situations where competing firms, or people, would be racing to pick someone up when the call came in, thus endangering those around them.

Further, through regulation, companies cannot say, "We don't service that area." They must go to where the ride is being requested with few exceptions.

C) Contrary to what Uber claims, they do not perform due diligence on their drivers. There are numerous stories where someone gets picked up (again, not sharing) and the picture of the driver does not match the person driving. I remember one case where the driver admitted it was his brother's Uber account but he didn't want to do the driving. This then defeats the whole purpose of accountability. At least with a taxi company you have someone to go back to if you have a complaint.

D) There was an article not too long ago talking about how to get good ratings from Uber drivers and one of the ways was to give them good tips. Um, what? Their job is to pick you up (again, not sharing) and deliver to your destination. If this were a "ride sharing" event you would compensate the person for their gas and that's it. Instead, not only are you paying them for the gas used, but also an additional amount for them to earn a profit on the ride AND a tip on top. Explain how that is not a taxi business.

E) Using eBay is not a good example when talking about changing the dynamics of a system. eBay, and PayPal, must still adhere to some banking regulations, accountability regulations and business regulations. What Uber is saying is, "Nope, we're completely different. Even though people call us to be picked up, we're not a taxi company and so shouldn't be regulated as one."

Which is of course BS as shown above.

People like to think that Net makes things different. No, it doesn't. It might change, to a limited extent, how something is done, but it's still doing the same thing as those who came before it. You think Amazon isn't regulated like a business?

I tend to agree with you.

 

[Yardley]

A) Uber is a taxi company, pure and simple. They are not a "ride sharing" company because the drivers are not just happening to be going the same place the rider is. The rider makes a conscious decision to call the company and request to be picked up. That is not sharing.

B) The reason for regulation in the taxi industry is because if there were no or almost no regulation you would literally have situations where competing firms, or people, would be racing to pick someone up when the call came in, thus endangering those around them.

Further, through regulation, companies cannot say, "We don't service that area." They must go to where the ride is being requested with few exceptions.

C) Contrary to what Uber claims, they do not perform due diligence on their drivers. There are numerous stories where someone gets picked up (again, not sharing) and the picture of the driver does not match the person driving. I remember one case where the driver admitted it was his brother's Uber account but he didn't want to do the driving. This then defeats the whole purpose of accountability. At least with a taxi company you have someone to go back to if you have a complaint.

D) There was an article not too long ago talking about how to get good ratings from Uber drivers and one of the ways was to give them good tips. Um, what? Their job is to pick you up (again, not sharing) and deliver to your destination. If this were a "ride sharing" event you would compensate the person for their gas and that's it. Instead, not only are you paying them for the gas used, but also an additional amount for them to earn a profit on the ride AND a tip on top. Explain how that is not a taxi business.

E) Using eBay is not a good example when talking about changing the dynamics of a system. eBay, and PayPal, must still adhere to some banking regulations, accountability regulations and business regulations. What Uber is saying is, "Nope, we're completely different. Even though people call us to be picked up, we're not a taxi company and so shouldn't be regulated as one."

Which is of course BS as shown above.

People like to think that Net makes things different. No, it doesn't. It might change, to a limited extent, how something is done, but it's still doing the same thing as those who came before it. You think Amazon isn't regulated like a business?

Speaking of BS.

So Amed, cannot simply drive his brother Mohamed's cab? Do the cabs have retinal scanners in them I am not aware of? Since the cabs are regulated there are not under served neighborhoods and riders reporting cabs will not pick them up?

"Racing to pick someone up!" Oh NOES!!!!!

No cabbie wants to find out he wasted a trip and the caller is not there. With Uber, how is this innane idea of yours even a factor. If anything it PREVENTS what you are whining about. As it stands cabbies can and do hustle to pick people up because people do call another cab company if they think you are slow to arrive.

Glad government fixed all that.

 

[Killswitch1]

The only people making money on uber is the people at the top. It's not rocket science but as a business owner you need to know what profit/loss is and be able to realize a profit in business.

By the time uber driver do the maths they make about 6 cents an hour.

Of course like many things mathematical.....they don't use all the right numbers and they bend it to make their brains think its the best thing since sliced bread.

Beyond that......if they did make a profit.....theyre claiming the income.....right?

lol

 

[Yardley]

The only people making money on uber is the people at the top. It's not rocket science but as a business owner you need to know what profit/loss is and be able to realize a profit in business.

By the time uber driver do the maths they make about 6 cents an hour.

Of course like many things mathematical.....they don't use all the right numbers and they bend it to make their brains think its the best thing since sliced bread.

Beyond that......if they did make a profit.....they're claiming the income.....right?

lol

Assuming they are going somewhere anyway, the point would be to defray at least a portion of their own expenses.

Probably depends on what their actual operating costs are. A lot of small businesses fail because no one thinks about wear and tear and actual, not accounting based, physical depreciation.

I used to drive 40,000 miles a year. The cheapest way to do that I found was to buy a mint used Mercedes turbo-diesel with 150,000 miles on it which I could, at the time, find all day long for under 7-8 grand and put another 100,000 on it. I noticed some small gypsy one-guy cab companies doing just that as well.

 

[Yardley]

The answer to the disparity is not to make it more difficult and more expensive for Uber drivers to make it "fair." the answer is to make it easier and less expensive for drivers to become licensed cabbies.

All it would take is an $8 fee at the MVD to report to them you wish to be a cabbie. No different in time for the clerk or expense of issuance for a replacement drivers license. Just like replacement licenses you could also do this online. Once you change your status to commercial, your driving record should then available online to anyone that wishes to see it.

Under served neighborhoods would be served because the barrier for entry would be a driving record you customers feel OK with and a car that customers are willing to get into.

 

[renard_ruse]

I don't know much about Über, but how is it fair to traditional taxi services. The regulations of taxis are strict. Medallions can cost hundreds of thousands of dollars in addition to permit fees. So, again, how is it fair, irrespective of your opinion of the quality of the service?

That's my feeling on it. Just because they use "new technology" to get customers doesn't mean they shouldn't have to follow the rules other companies have to follow. People get mad if you say that though. Hipsters love their Uber.

 

[someoneyouknow]

Speaking of BS.

So Amed, cannot simply drive his brother Mohamed's cab? Do the cabs have retinal scanners in them I am not aware of? Since the cabs are regulated there are not under served neighborhoods and riders reporting cabs will not pick them up?

"Racing to pick someone up!" Oh NOES!!!!!

No cabbie wants to find out he wasted a trip and the caller is not there. With Uber, how is this innane idea of yours even a factor. If anything it PREVENTS what you are whining about. As it stands cabbies can and do hustle to pick people up because people do call another cab company if they think you are slow to arrive.

Glad government fixed all that.

No, Ahmed cannot driver his brother's cab. That is the whole point. Admed is the driver, not his brother. The cab company is on the hook if anything like that happens.

As to the neighborhood thing, I did say with few exceptions because there are places where cab companies have fought not to go to because of the dangers involved. Maybe only at certain times, but it does happen.

Further, how does this prevent an Uber driver from doing the same thing? Some guy or gal in their nice shiny car doesn't want to go to the ghetto because of recent shootings. Now we're no further ahead because the driver doesn't want to do the very thing the cab company has complained about.

Cabs hustle to where they are ASSIGNED a call. That is different than having three people all trying to get to the same location at the same time.

Over regulation is a bad thing. Regulation to make sure things are done as safely as possible and everyone knows the rules is the best one can hope for. Where lack of regulation, or enforcement of regulation exists, we have situations like the West, Texas chemical factory explosion or the 2008 financial meltdown.

Unless you're saying that is what you want.

 

[Yardley]

So the cab company, undoubtedly formed as an LLC, is "on the hook" if someone uses the cab that amed takes home every night? How would anyone know? What are the consequences other than having to fork over money for a license for the new LLC if caught. Paying money to the government to get a certificate that NO ONE checks up on, ever is meaningless.

 

[BotanyBoy]

I don't know much about Über, but how is it fair to traditional taxi services. The regulations of taxis are strict. Medallions can cost hundreds of thousands of dollars in addition to permit fees. So, again, how is it fair, irrespective of your opinion of the quality of the service?

It's fair because traditional taxi services have been using their bullshit Medallions and permits to keep new folks out of the industry, they use it to keep people from competing with them.

Uber gave that bullshit the finger and said "Free market mother fuckers!!!" and now everyone is ass hurt because they are doing it BETTER Than the shitty cab services.

It's not fair to any business that has gone through the legal process of setting up a business.

You mean the legal process of hiring a politician to corner the market for them to keep competition out?

Same thing is happening to cannabis.....want a licence? 5 million bucks....because bro's wrote it into the law to keep little guys out.

The million dollar taxi medallion is no different......the medallion/permits aren't regulation they are crony bullshit.

So the cab company, undoubtedly formed as an LLC, is "on the hook" if someone uses the cab that amed takes home every night? How would anyone know? What are the consequences other than having to fork over money for a license for the new LLC if caught. Paying money to the government to get a certificate that NO ONE checks up on, ever is meaningless.

Just like with any bazzillion fucking dollar permit/licence that paperwork doesn't do a god damn thing except keep anyone not rich as all fuck from opening a company and putting Mr.I hire Senators out of bidnizz for sucking.

It's the ONLY reason it exist and isn't a 250 dollar receipt 'licence' for any other non super lucrative business anyone can go get.

That's my feeling on it. Just because they use "new technology" to get customers doesn't mean they shouldn't have to follow the rules other companies have to follow. People get mad if you say that though. Hipsters love their Uber.

Oh look who's pro crony corrupt asshole, anti freedom, anti capitalism.........shocking

 

[Conager]

It's fair because traditional taxi services have been using their bullshit Medallions and permits to keep new folks out of the industry, they use it to keep people from competing with them.

Uber gave that bullshit the finger and said "Free market mother fuckers!!!" and now everyone is ass hurt because they are doing it BETTER Than the shitty cab services.



You mean the legal process of hiring a politician to corner the market for them to keep competition out?

Same thing is happening to cannabis.....want a licence? 5 million bucks....because bro's wrote it into the law to keep little guys out.

The million dollar taxi medallion is no different......the medallion/permits aren't regulation they are crony bullshit.



Just like with any bazzillion fucking dollar permit/licence that paperwork doesn't do a god damn thing except keep anyone not rich as all fuck from opening a company and putting Mr.I hire Senators out of bidnizz for sucking.

Which is the only reason such things exist, aside from the relatively small revenue stream.

 

[BotanyBoy]

Which is the only reason such things exist, aside from the relatively small revenue stream.

Yea

I hope Uber KILLS yellow cab co....they fucking suck ass.

 

[bronzeage]

If Uber is such a good deal, taxi drivers can rip that medallion off and throw it away. Sign up for Uber and keep driving.
.

 

[Conager]

If Uber is such a good deal, taxi drivers can rip that medallion off and throw it away. Sign up for Uber and keep driving.
.

Sounds right. The complaint seems to be about it being too easy to be an Uber driver, not that it is too hard to be a cabdriver.

 

[Spins]

Is life?

 

[Sean Renaud]

And watch the industry fail. Of course Uber is bullshit and of course the government or other entities are supposed to protect their corner of the sky. Dear god people stop believing thie free market bullshit that hasn't held up in centuries.