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

Post by CydeWeys » Sun, Aug 21, 2016, 11:29 PM UTC

ptaipale wrote: post #493

thwarted wrote: post #465

Earlier quoted context omitted.

illegally drove in a bike lane to make a right turn at a light, cutting off another car at the light that was legally trying to proceed right Diverging off-topic, and your account is light on specifics needed for this divergence... http://pedalfortcollins.com/righthandturns/

Good point. Rules of the road regarding right turns and bike lanes vary depending on jurisdiction. But even though your link was for Colorado and I'm in northern Europe, the rule is the same: a right-turning car actually should merge into bike lane. So, sometimes it could be that the Uber (or taxi) driver knows more about the rules of the road that the passenger, and when the passenger complains based on wrong unders…

Post by function_seven » Sun, Aug 21, 2016, 11:39 PM UTC

ars wrote: post #112

function_seven wrote: post #77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's not really relevant to the GGP comment, though. The government can take the tax money and contract out the development work on an app. Or use cheap student labor.

Of course it's relevant. The "government" doesn't make apps directly ever. The difference is who speced the project, or came up with the ideas.

Post by CydeWeys » Sun, Aug 21, 2016, 11:54 PM UTC

FT_intern wrote: post #437

CydeWeys wrote: post #433

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> If you're smart enough to get into an elite university, you don't have to worry about the cost. Full stop. Absolutely not. Financial aid is dependent on parents' income and wealth, regardless of parents' willingness to actually bankroll said school. The cost is significant, rivaling the average annual gross household income, but worse because you pay high interest rates on top. Don't kid yourself, worrying about th…

if you're smart enough to get into an elite university, you're smart enough to get a full ride at an upper tier but not elite university. And if your parents had a high enough income where you had to pay full tuition, then you already enjoyed an upper middle class upbringing. It's a slight disadvantage and not the difference between going to Harvard and not going to college at all.

Post by GarrisonPrime » Sun, Aug 21, 2016, 11:59 PM UTC

johnsea wrote: post #279

As long as taxi drivers have higher salaries and are better protected this is a good move. I very much salute the innovations uber enabled. Only there should be a law which guarantees a decent minimum salary for uber riders. No good to allow an income-race-to-the-bottom for drivers.

Post by GarrisonPrime » Mon, Aug 22, 2016, 12:04 AM UTC

thesumofall wrote: post #255

briandear wrote: post #227

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…