Massachusetts to tax ride-hailing apps, give the money to taxis • Hacker News Board

Re: Massachusetts to tax ride-hailing apps, give the money to taxis

#231

Post by praxulus » Sun, Aug 21, 2016, 7:46 AM UTC

acidburnNSA wrote: post #14

rev_bird wrote: post #2

This is a pretty surreal move: >The law says the money will help taxi businesses to adopt "new technologies and advanced service, safety and operational capabilities" and to support workforce development... [Larry Meister, manager of the Boston area's Independent Taxi Operator's Association] said the money could go toward improving a smartphone app his association has started using, or to other big needs. I'm not an…

I mostly agree with you, and I would have wholeheartedly agreed with you 2 weeks ago, but I just read a book ("Listen, Liberal" by Thomas Frank) that makes some interesting points about how liberals have shifted from representing working people to representing professionals, and to worshiping innovation. While free trade and disruptive technology is good for the professional class, it inherently increases inequality.…

Why not a social safety net and access to education for everyone, rather than trying to protect specific industries?

Re: Massachusetts to tax ride-hailing apps, give the money to taxis

#232

Post by tao_oat » Sun, Aug 21, 2016, 7:46 AM UTC

stale2002 wrote: post #178

Trundle wrote: post #114

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'll bite although this isn't the most researched of my opinions that's for sure. Humans happiness isn't concerned with absolute standard of living but more comparative standard of living. I don't mean just conscious comparison in a competitive manner, I mean in setting what counts as normal to our brains. Consider the standard of living we've obtained compared to what humans had for the vast majority of our 200 000…

No matter how much money you have, you can't buy a better coke. Income inequality is a misleading metric. I would argue that equality has vastly increased over the years. The rich don't really live much better lives than the middle class. Rich or poor we all have roofs over our heads, we all have access to relatively affordable methods of travel to get anywhere in the world in a day, we all use the same IPhones, watc…

It doesn't sound like you've ever been poor. Quality of life is about far more than the goods you can consume. It's also about job security, your chances of getting promoted, autonomy, fulfillment, and so on. If you know that you're [absolutely screwed][1] if you get fired, or get sick, or miss a paycheck, you don't really get to feel safe.

[1]: www.forbes.com/sites/maggiemcgrath/2015/01/07/majority-of-americans-are-one-surprise-away-from-financial-disaster-survey-says/

Re: Massachusetts to tax ride-hailing apps, give the money to taxis

#233

Post by praxulus » Sun, Aug 21, 2016, 7:49 AM UTC

dsacco wrote: post #134

HillRat wrote: post #92

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>I'd like to see a dialectic about why income inequality increasing is bad, in of itself. One main issue is that income inequality decreases socioeconomic mobility by inflating the cost of scarce goods that improve earnings capabilities. So 4K TVs are cheaper but college tuition becomes unaffordable, because good universities and grad programs are valuable, scarce goods that the wealthy can outbid everyone else on. P…

In response to your main issue regarding socioeconomic mobility - why is this, in turn, a problem? If you can demonstrate that reduced social mobility is an issue, and that this is increased by progressively greater income inequality (the latter of which I probably agree with on cursory inspection), then it seems income inequality is a net loss. However, from a utilitarian perspective, I don't see a reason to care ab…

Lack of social mobility means life is unfair.

Obviously life will always be somewhat unfair, but we should always see things that decrease fairness as a negative, unless they make up for it in other ways.

Re: Massachusetts to tax ride-hailing apps, give the money to taxis

#234

Post by tao_oat » Sun, Aug 21, 2016, 7:55 AM UTC

AndyNemmity wrote: post #6

rev_bird wrote: post #2

This is a pretty surreal move: >The law says the money will help taxi businesses to adopt "new technologies and advanced service, safety and operational capabilities" and to support workforce development... [Larry Meister, manager of the Boston area's Independent Taxi Operator's Association] said the money could go toward improving a smartphone app his association has started using, or to other big needs. I'm not an…

Cab drivers don't become homeless drifters, they become your next lyft pick up. And the quality of service of Lyft and Uber have gone down the more and more cab drivers become drivers. It's starting to not feel like much of differentiation.

They become your next lyft pick up (with drastically decreased wages).

Re: Massachusetts to tax ride-hailing apps, give the money to taxis

#235

Post by pjc50 » Sun, Aug 21, 2016, 7:55 AM UTC

hx87 wrote: post #191

tro2102 wrote: post #109

Earlier quoted context omitted.

how about "suck it up and do it anyway"? I don't necessarily disagree with this sentiment, but this doesn't really address the question, which is about what happens to an industry when it's made redundant by technology. Cab drivers competing with self-driving cars can't "suck it up". "what if they don't want to" in regard to people working? Again, I feel you haven't read the spirit of this comment accurately. What ha…

> What happens to an entire class of working people In a free market capitalist society, the most optimal case is that they spend a significant portion of their earnings buying capital (i.e. stocks and bonds), so as time goes on more of their earnings come from capital. Unfortunately, in the USA at least, we make capital accumulation ridiculously hard for working class people due to the cult of homeownership and a ta…

Homeownership is capital accumulation.

I'm not sure that a system where a large part of GDP is directed at stock purchase is sustainable; that's how private pensions are supposed to work but the system is creaking.

Re: Massachusetts to tax ride-hailing apps, give the money to taxis

#236

Post by [deleted] » Sun, Aug 21, 2016, 8:04 AM UTC

lpolovets wrote: post #221

Obviously the logic is mystifying, but the math behind this is baffling as well: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Taxicabs_of_the_United_States#... says there are 1825 cabs in Boston. Boston is 10% of Massachusetts' population, so let's say there are 18k cabs in the state. http://www.reuters.com/article/us-massachusetts-uber-idUSKCN... says 5 cents/ride-hailing app will go toward taxis, and Uber+Lyft do 2.5m rider per m…

[deleted]

Re: Massachusetts to tax ride-hailing apps, give the money to taxis

#237

Post by wutbrodo » Sun, Aug 21, 2016, 8:06 AM UTC

lpolovets wrote: post #221

Obviously the logic is mystifying, but the math behind this is baffling as well: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Taxicabs_of_the_United_States#... says there are 1825 cabs in Boston. Boston is 10% of Massachusetts' population, so let's say there are 18k cabs in the state. http://www.reuters.com/article/us-massachusetts-uber-idUSKCN... says 5 cents/ride-hailing app will go toward taxis, and Uber+Lyft do 2.5m rider per m…

> there are 1825 cabs in Boston. Boston is 10% of Massachusetts' population, so let's say there are 18k cabs in the state.

The number would likely be way lower than this (it doesn't make too much sense to extrapolate linearly from the densest urban population), but your point still stands even you double or triple the $/driver. That's pretty weird...

Re: Massachusetts to tax ride-hailing apps, give the money to taxis

#238

Post by SilasX » Sun, Aug 21, 2016, 8:07 AM UTC

jacobolus wrote: post #185

ricw wrote: post #93

This is unbelievable. Never have I used a more corrupt and unfriendly taxi service as the one in Boston / Cambridge. And they are supposed to be subsidised?! I have 1) been driven round crazy detours to up my cost 2) been forced to drive a detour because the card machine was broken and they only accepted cash 3) been turned down because my destination wasn't far enough 4) been shouted at because I was watching the fr…

I lived in Cambridge for about 6 years from ~2004–2011. Nothing but positive experiences with Boston-area cabs. The drivers were uniformly friendly and competent, and had no trouble with the ridiculously convoluted MA street layouts. When I was carrying suitcases or moving boxes of books around, they were patient and helpful with loading/unloading. When I left my wallet one time, the driver called me as soon as he fo…

It sounds like the difference between you and the others is that you were a resident while the others weren't, which may have showed in some way and made them think they could rip off the others but not you.

Re: Massachusetts to tax ride-hailing apps, give the money to taxis

#239

Post by maverick_iceman » Sun, Aug 21, 2016, 8:07 AM UTC

raquo wrote: post #177

maverick_iceman wrote: post #130

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Haven't we heard this same spiel for the last 150 years? The revolution is always one week away and this is a time-invariant statement.

Haven't we had revolutions in the last 150 years? Not in the US, but other countries had a few. But that's not the point. You don't need an armed uprising when you have elections. You need populism. Trump / Brexit / far right parties are not "revolution".

> Haven't we had revolutions in the last 150 years? Not in the US, but other countries had a few.

Yes, and it worked out so wonderfully for them. :)

Re: Massachusetts to tax ride-hailing apps, give the money to taxis

#240

Post by wutbrodo » Sun, Aug 21, 2016, 8:08 AM UTC

akulbe wrote: post #198

If the taxi cab companies can't make it on their own, they should go out of business. As a self-employed person, I shouldn't expect someone else to bail me out by their efforts. If I can't make it on my own steam, I close up shop. When this happens, it's unfortunate, and unpleasant, but it's a simple fact of doing business. Our parents and grandparents would balk and roll in their graves at the thought of this idea t…

> Our parents and grandparents would balk and roll in their graves at the thought of this idea that someone else should shoulder the burden of bailing you out.

That's definitely not true. People have been kicking and screaming (and regulating) against being obsoleted by technology since literally the beginning of industrialization, and even earlier if you broaden that to "obsoleted by a change in market conditions". The only difference between that and asking for a bailout is that the bailout happens later in the process.