Live data from Hacker News

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

reuters.com

251–260 of 539 posts

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

#251
post #223

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> what happens to an industry when it's made redundant by technology We have over 200 years experience of countless industries being made redundant by technology. It's not a new scary thing that has never happened before.

So how would you solve the problem based on that experience?

A good welfare system pretty much solves it. I'm not sure why America is struggling to create one.

Here in Australia the government will happily pay you $300 a week until you can find a job. It costs us something like $9.5B per year, which is pretty much nothing. Our government doesn't have to disincentivise innovation to help people adjust.

Sure, some people are going to find it hard to live on that amount, but they won't go hungry or homeless. I think it's well within the realms of "suck it up".

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

#253

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Again, I feel you haven't read the spirit of this comment accurately. The comment specifically talked about those people not wanting to do another form of work. It wasn't a generic "lets talk about mass automation induced redundancy" which appears to be what you're trying to discuss with me. As you'll note, I'm pro basic income. I just don't think it's fair to say I'm not properly addressing the spirit, when in this…

I didn't say they don't want to do another job. I said they don't want to go back to school. They either hated school or were bored sick of it. So they'll generally look for other jobs available at their skill level. That's why inequality grows. Disruptive tech creates jobs for educated ambitious people while displacing people who are less so. Yeah we as a society can tell them it's their problem, but there might be…

[deleted]

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

#254

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Taxis are a dying industry, but taxi drivers are not adapting. How do you know? My impression is that most taxi drivers are very busy adapting. But I don't know either. Let's be clear: The people hardest hit by Uber/Lyft is taxi company owners . > Clearly, asking them to adapt overnight would be too demanding Uber has been around for half a decade. How many decades does it take?

> How do you know? My impression is that most taxi drivers are very busy adapting. But I don't know either. To be clear: I don't know either. I'm an outsider to this industry. I'm just offering arguments. > Let's be clear: The people hardest hit by Uber/Lyft is taxi company owners. I don't think this is true. They're losing the most money, but they have lots of money. Taxi drivers risk losing all their revenue, which…

Taxi drivers risk losing the difference between what they can earn working as a taxi driver and what they can earn on ride sharing apps. It's probably a fair drop but hardly all of their income.

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

#255

I believe they have a point. The traditional taxi industry _can_ be rescued. Living in Germany I use myTaxi which is basically providing the same interface as Uber but connects you with professional taxis that are regulated, insured, and being paid proper wages. There is simply no difference in convenience (even the opposite: you can book taxis in advance) and the driving experience itself is typically by far better…

Define a 'proper' wage please? I don't know what that means apparently. I would think it would be a wage at which the supply curve and the demand curve meet for your particular skill. However if seems that you're implying that people ought to get paid more than the demand curve for their services would support, which is why I ask the question because that would be absurd. That would mean that someone else would have…

I define a proper wage as such that for jobs that society deems necessary (e.g., taxi drivers) people are able to live a life above the poverty line. The textbook definition of supply and demand is a bit too simplistic here. Uber has artificially increased supply to starve of competition and to create network effects for the sake of them, they lowered prices by creating externalities that others have to pay for, and they lured (sometimes barely educated drivers) into a job that paid less and less over time.

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

#256

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's good to care about taxi drivers, but not because they are taxi drivers. Go back >200 years. In England, Spinning Jennies replaced weavers, and there were luddites who tried to resist, but the solution was not to start subsidizing weavers; and not even a specific tax to weaving machines to provide for the weavers specifically; the solution was to slowly build a social security system, and not just for master weav…

> putting a burden on something productive just because it is better What aspect of Uber is better than a regular taxi? I can hail taxis from my phone just as well. They take me to the destination. I think Uber found a way to subsidize their fleet with drivers own cars and not pay some taxes to the state which the regular taxi drivers have to pay. Maybe I am missing something...

Yep, I don't get it either.

taxi |ˈtaksi| noun ( pl. taxis ) a motor vehicle licensed to transport passengers in return for payment of a fare and typically fitted with a taximeter.

Uber is a taxi service. Uber _is_ licensed in the sense that they are allowed to operate.

Saying Uber isn't a taxi service is a load of dingos kidneys, in my arrogant opinion.

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

#257
post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.…

Many of them don't want to go back to school or get technical training... What do we tell the taxi and truck drivers when Uber shows up with self-drivers, etc.? Uhhh, how about "suck it up and do it anyway"? I know plenty of people on hn are all about the "making the world a better place" shtick and would work anyway/for the sake of it but for the vast majority of people work straight up means doing things you otherw…

I don't fully get your comment. The thesis of your argument is, "Many of them don't want to go back to school or get technical training... What do we tell the taxi and truck drivers when Uber shows up with self-drivers, etc."

At the end of you comment, I noticed you brought up a basic income. I think you realized the work force is really shrinking, and becoming very exploitive. When was the last Labor Union formed in the U.S.?

Let's start with this whole, "Go back to school to earn more money." And major in what? Let's take a white 40-50 male. Exactly what degree/certification is he going to get in order to get that carrot on the stick, or move up? The economic world has changed so much--I don't know too many degrees that will further that guy in life. Right now, maybe registered nursing, but that's been hot since ObamaCare, and who know what that future holds. Hay, I got a great one; go back to even a middle tiered law school, and hang up your shingle at 50. Wait for that phone to ring. I know a black entomologist, with a degree, who literally works for Orkin. He was recently reprimanded by the company because he left the air conditioning on while in park. (He was in Alabama, during a heat wave.)

My point is I hear people say go back to school. I have seen people go into great debt(debt that isn't bankruptable), only to graduate with a degree, sometimes a degree in the hard sciences, that are working multiple minimum wage jobs. What exactly is a 50 year old going to do with a degree in mechanical engineering? I don't even want to think what they would do with a bachelor's in computer science. And please, don't tell me this industry isn't all about age. I think that might change one day when VC's calm down about finding the next Zukerburg, and realize this industry is about profit, and not reaching for the stars, or hitting a once in a decade home run with a ambiguous individual, usually a guy who wants to get that girl with financial success? A guy who was just in the right place in the right time, horny, and had the privilege of being a middle class white guy.

My point is I always hear education is the answer. I see so many people with multiple credentials on their basement wall, and no career. I won't even bring up the certificate programs advertised on t.v., and how many people spent thousands on worthless paper.

I don't have a solution to this mess. Yes--there's a part of me that would close down the borders, and become an semi-island until we figure out what to do. I would also like to see some taxes/regulation on tech. Yes--I said it--I'm the devil. I just know there's less real jobs out there than the government claims. Most people I know are barely getting by.

As to Uber paying a tax; I could care less. I have watched that company from it's sperm days. I have watched people go into debt/ruin their credit buying a Uber approved four door vechicle, and not making the money they were told was at the end of the stick.

I don't want to get into a long winded debate, but this economy has changed so much; I'm literally in shock. It might seem great when you are in this tech bubble, but wait until it explodes. Watch what the homeless population in San Francosco spikes up to. Sure the rich kids will move back home, and maybe pull out of the crash with help, and contacts for family, but the poor/middle class kids will be at Home Depot mixing paint.

Remember tech is one of the few industries you can get into with just talent. You don't need a degree. You do need some good skills, and the Internet is making learning those skill exponentially easier.

So we get back to what that older person is going to do in this sharing economy. I honestly don't have a clue. Try landscaping at 50, and competing with immigrants who see nothing unusual about putting four to a bedroom.

The Titans of business, or the wealthy are not getting anymore--what's the word; financially moral? In my world it's a Christian attitude. (Save the religious bashing for another time. Their are some good proverbs that some you should look at, but then again why; being a fair guy isn't even admired in certain circles. It's all about maximum accumulation of wealth. They are not offering jobs livable wage jobs with a future. Thay are praised for exploiting certain, usually older, or minority workers to further their wealth, and don't just don't give a dam about how their workers live, or their workers' future.

Oh they, do care about what trendy, like animals, or global warming, but it can't interfere with their money nut. I see a dearth of real morality lately. Why? I have my suspicions, but to tired to verbalize, and don't want to argue with the persons who are offended by this post.

I noticed at the end of you post you brought up a basic income. Maybe deep inside you can forsee the future?

Between 1896 and 1996 world population went form 1 billion to 9 billion.(Too tired to verify that statistic--yes, I'm fifty, but I belive its correct.).

What are people going to do to provide for food, and housing? I guess we will just service the wealthy? Great times!

(I said some very controversial statements. They might be from a warped mind? I just see a bleak future, and too many "Hay I'm doing fine--what's the problem?")

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

#258

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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-…

Compared to how extremely screwed you'd be even just 200 years ago? Actually, not even that, 80 years ago.

I think you underestimate how bad things used to be.

Today, if something unexpected happens, you are almost certainly not going to die by like next week.

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

#260
post #248

There are two competing narratives about ride-hailing apps success: 1) They are profitable because they are finding loopholes in relevant legislation, or, 2) they are profitable because they are injecting competition and new ideas into a stagnating industry dominated by government-protected monopolies (or oligopolies). Your opinion of the law will likely depend on which narrative you find more persuasive.

> They are profitable We have no evidence of this, and this is scary to me, for various reasons. Uber/Lyft/et al are all about trying to gain a "lock" on the industry. If they succeed, they're going to hose me, badly. If they fail, they're going to leave a big crater behind from all the taxis they drove out of business. Not friendly.

What makes you think that cab companies aren't ripping you off already? In my area, you pay over twice the amount for a cab compared to uber.
Post reply on HN