Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Juno to soft-launch this month as the anti-Uber service

washingtonpost.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–58 of 58 posts

Re: Juno to soft-launch this month as the anti-Uber service

#51

Post by [deleted] »

toomuchtodo wrote: post #14
dopamean wrote: post #9

I cant help but wonder if Juno and others are overestimating how much people care about the treatment of their drivers. I think very many people, myself included, would say that it is important to them that their driver is happy with his relationship with his employer. But at the end of the day does that really translate to a change in purchasing behavior? For me it does not. I use Uber here in Austin because it is s…

This is why government regulation is so important. Most people don't mind others being exploited if its beneficial to them.

[deleted]

Re: Juno to soft-launch this month as the anti-Uber service

#52

Post by ArnoldP »

redthrowaway wrote: post #46
ArnoldP wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

All other things being equal I'll go with the service that gives more to the person doing the actual labour.

Buy anything from Amazon? Because they're infamous for treating their non-engineer employees terribly, yet I and most people I know still buy from them because they're cheap and have great customer service.

No, I don't. But I'm not in the US and Amazon doesn't really present that great a deal once you factor in shipping, taxes, duty etc.

I don't shop at Walmart though, because of their poor track record treating their employees well.

Re: Juno to soft-launch this month as the anti-Uber service

#53

Post by ArnoldP »

Laaw wrote: post #34
ArnoldP wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

All other things being equal I'll go with the service that gives more to the person doing the actual labour.

But all things are most certainly not going to be equal, least of all cost and availability.

There's atleast 15% wiggle room on each journey, seeing as Uber takes 20% off the top. Aside from their expenses promoting and competing with other 'ride sharing' services I don't see where that cash is going.

Re: Juno to soft-launch this month as the anti-Uber service

#54

Post by Laaw »

ArnoldP wrote: post #53
Laaw wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But all things are most certainly not going to be equal, least of all cost and availability.

There's atleast 15% wiggle room on each journey, seeing as Uber takes 20% off the top. Aside from their expenses promoting and competing with other 'ride sharing' services I don't see where that cash is going.

> There's atleast 15% wiggle room on each journey, seeing as Uber takes 20% off the top.

Seems like a number pulled from nowhere.

Re: Juno to soft-launch this month as the anti-Uber service

#55

Post by rayiner »

toomuchtodo wrote: post #14
dopamean wrote: post #9

I cant help but wonder if Juno and others are overestimating how much people care about the treatment of their drivers. I think very many people, myself included, would say that it is important to them that their driver is happy with his relationship with his employer. But at the end of the day does that really translate to a change in purchasing behavior? For me it does not. I use Uber here in Austin because it is s…

This is why government regulation is so important. Most people don't mind others being exploited if its beneficial to them.

There is more too it. I don't "exercise my purchasing power" because I know whether I ride Uber or something else won't make a lick of difference in the grand scheme of things. But I'd be willing to pay more for drivers to make a little more if everyone else also had to do it so there would be a real impact.

Re: Juno to soft-launch this month as the anti-Uber service

#56

Post by [deleted] »

strictnein wrote: post #32
toomuchtodo wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Can you explain to me how you feel exploited by the government protecting someone from being taken advantage of economically? I would genuinely like to understand this.

Why does the government have a say on who I pay to drive me someplace and where they can drive me? Edit: And the exploitation I was referring to was of the taxi drivers under the current system, not myself.

[deleted]

Re: Juno to soft-launch this month as the anti-Uber service

#57

Post by rajacombinator »

toomuchtodo wrote: post #14
dopamean wrote: post #9

I cant help but wonder if Juno and others are overestimating how much people care about the treatment of their drivers. I think very many people, myself included, would say that it is important to them that their driver is happy with his relationship with his employer. But at the end of the day does that really translate to a change in purchasing behavior? For me it does not. I use Uber here in Austin because it is s…

This is why government regulation is so important. Most people don't mind others being exploited if its beneficial to them.

But people are fine with exploitation so long as a group of people we call "government" are the ones doing it. ;)

Re: Juno to soft-launch this month as the anti-Uber service

#58

Post by toomuchtodo »

rayiner wrote: post #55
toomuchtodo wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is why government regulation is so important. Most people don't mind others being exploited if its beneficial to them.

There is more too it. I don't "exercise my purchasing power" because I know whether I ride Uber or something else won't make a lick of difference in the grand scheme of things. But I'd be willing to pay more for drivers to make a little more if everyone else also had to do it so there would be a real impact.

Agree. Regulation is the only way to ensure you're dealing with the freeloader issue.
Post reply on HN