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

Lyft donates $1M to the ACLU, condemns Trump’s immigration actions

techcrunch.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

161–170 of 283 posts

Re: Lyft donates $1M to the ACLU, condemns Trump’s immigration actions

#161

Post by jakeogh »

justinpombrio wrote: post #112
mozumder wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Here's the great & intense statement from the New York Taxi Workers Alliance on their JFK strike: "NYTWA STATEMENT ON MUSLIM BAN: Professional drivers are over 20 times more likely to be murdered on the job than other workers. By sanctioning bigotry with his unconstitutional and inhumane executive order banning Muslim refugees from seven countries, the president is putting professional drivers in more danger than the…

I hate asking about downvotes, but I'm really confused why this comment has been pushed to the bottom. Why?

Well, it's not a "Muslim Ban" for starters. Look up the countries with the highest Muslim populations, then cross ref to the list of countries that have a 90 day (to start) ban.

Re: Lyft donates $1M to the ACLU, condemns Trump’s immigration actions

#162

Post by anjc »

facetube wrote: post #149
anjc wrote: post #143

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Corporations have NO moral obligation to oppose people that you happen to oppose. Lyft should be sued by their investors for misappropriation of funds.

I am not asking for opposition for the sake of opposition; I am asking for opposition because the claims of the administration are factually, demonstrably false.

Yeah again, Lyft's board is appointed with obligations to the company and the shareholders. Companies can have an ethos of social responsibility, but the board isn't there with an obligation to social responsibility, or to oppose politicians. When a non-profitable company is spending company funds based on the board's personal moral code...I'd have significant issues.

Re: Lyft donates $1M to the ACLU, condemns Trump’s immigration actions

#163

Post by baddox »

010a wrote: post #22
malloreon wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm a bit confused by the backlash at Uber. I saw the tweet saying they were suspending surge pricing to JFK. To me that make trips there less likely since drivers would make less. Wouldn't that be a show of solidarity with the temporarily striking taxi drivers union? I guess my question is, how does suspending surge pricing to JFK suggest Uber supports the executive order?

They could have disabled all pickups at JFK in true solidarity. I don't think disabling surge pricing is a show of solidarity. With Taxis striking, surge pricing would have skyrocketed. This feels more like Uber just wants to preempt an inevitable news story about how surge pricing hit 10x or something during the taxi strike, which would be bad PR. The article did say that Uber is working with its affected drivers to…

I would have liked to see solidarity, but I am extremely uncomfortable vilifying any individual or company for simply choosing to not participate in a protest.

I heard about the SFO protests yesterday, and I largely support the cause, and I could have made it there in time to join. I didn't. Do you question my moral compass? Did I do something wrong? I know people who largely support the issues of the women's march, yet did not attend, or attended only part of the rally or march. Should they be vilified?

I think this is a scary idea. Not everyone can or has to actively join every protest to "prove" that they support the platform or "have a moral compass."

Re: Lyft donates $1M to the ACLU, condemns Trump’s immigration actions

#164

Post by anjc »

facetube wrote: post #150
anjc wrote: post #139

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My point is that corporations don't start product development for even a bar of candy without extensive market segmentation and psychological profiling. This is completely run of the mill stuff in this day and age, and you can be certain that every major party in the western world does the exact same thing. OP is presenting it as if it's an unusual affront to democracy. It's extremely disingenuous or extremely ignora…

It is an unusual affront to democracy. Democracy depends upon a well-informaed public making rational decisions. It cannot and should not be gamed by for-profit "market makers" at the expense of the American taxpayer and the American people.

This is completely normal in politics and commerce.

And regardless, he was elected in a fair vote. The end. If you run another election now he'll win again.

Re: Lyft donates $1M to the ACLU, condemns Trump’s immigration actions

#165

Post by pjc50 »

pfarnsworth wrote: post #145
stephancoral wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Everything uber does is about money and they aren't afraid to flout the law / custom and "disrupt". They swooped in during a strike. They are scabs. They are obviously doing it to grab money. Their CEO is buddy buddy with Trump.

Is Elon Musk buddy-buddy with Trump as well, because they're on the same advisory board? Are you going to rant against Tesla too?

HN seems unwilling to confront this issue. People are complaining about Thiel, but Musk has been a darling for years.

Re: Lyft donates $1M to the ACLU, condemns Trump’s immigration actions

#166

Post by bmpafa »

loeg wrote: post #152
sundaeofshock wrote: post #130

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Drivers are only allowed to turn down a limited number of rides before they are no longer allowed to be uber drivers for the day.

Can't they just turn off the app for an hour?

I think this sort of protest requires organization. Uber's surge pricing (which I assume drivers didn't know would be suspended in time to plan a protest) basically guarantees seamless scabbing, so the opportunity cost of the protest becomes unreasonable.

Re: Lyft donates $1M to the ACLU, condemns Trump’s immigration actions

#167

Post by nerfhammer »

pikzen wrote: post #84
rashkov wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

edit: Re-reading this, and I realize I missed your point. You're absolutely right -- they did not say "we are cutting surge pricing in support of the protest". This was my original post for posterity: "They did say so. This was their tweet: 'Our CEO's reaction to immigration order: "We'll compensate drivers impacted by the ban pro bono for next 3 months." http://ubr.to/standingup'"

They're helping their own workers. While a good thing, the rest of ther message is complete PR and sending ubers to JFK undermines the strikes, because it's such an easy way for them to make a profit.

Turning off surge pricing sends fewer Ubers to JFK! They make less money, not more with surge pricing off! Makes no sense!

Re: Lyft donates $1M to the ACLU, condemns Trump’s immigration actions

#168

Post by facetube »

anjc wrote: post #162
facetube wrote: post #149

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I am not asking for opposition for the sake of opposition; I am asking for opposition because the claims of the administration are factually, demonstrably false.

Yeah again, Lyft's board is appointed with obligations to the company and the shareholders. Companies can have an ethos of social responsibility, but the board isn't there with an obligation to social responsibility, or to oppose politicians. When a non-profitable company is spending company funds based on the board's personal moral code...I'd have significant issues.

The only moral code here is fact: contrary to the administration's claims, the September 11th attacks did not originate in – or have a material connection to – these countries. Citing the September 11th attacks as a reason to restrict immigration from these countries does not follow logically, and therefore must be opposed on a factual basis. The claim is not true.

Re: Lyft donates $1M to the ACLU, condemns Trump’s immigration actions

#169

Post by eropple »

benchaney wrote: post #132
pikzen wrote: post #101

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In most professions, there's a feeling of unity. Taxi companies and drivers will either stand with striking drivers, or be respectful enough to not disrupt their action. Then comes Uber, the vulture that swoops in all in the name of disrupting the market. They're allowed to do it, sure. Whether it's morally right is another thing.

It is definitely morally right. Calling Uber a vulture ignores the reality that the world doesn't stop just because some protesters are unhappy.

"Some protestors are unhappy" is a really interesting way of phrasing "the federal government is embarking on a concerted attack on 1.7% of the population for reasons at best murky."

Be better, please.

Re: Lyft donates $1M to the ACLU, condemns Trump’s immigration actions

#170

Post by pm90 »

rashkov wrote: post #34
awolf wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Travis Kalanick, Uber's CEO, made public statements indicating that Uber must work with the Trump administration. Four days later Uber stepped up as scrubs while the rest of the New York's taxi service protested Trump's deplorable racist actions. It's hard to pretend this is a coincidence.

I'm not denying that, and I feel weird defending Uber at all, but then you'd also need to account for why they offered to compensate their drivers affected by this travel ban, and why would they lower their surge pricing. I'm okay with saying that they're trying to play both sides of this.

Well, I'm glad you said what you said even though, as you admit, you feel weird defending Uber. Actions are much more louder and substantive than words and if Uber does good things, I am glad that this forum still has members who will rightfully point that out (instead of it devolving into an echo chamber)
Post reply on HN