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

191–200 of 283 posts

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

#191

Post by imaginenore »

dang wrote: post #158
imaginenore wrote: post #118

If you're talking about moral basis, why would you support the immigration from these radical muslim countries? Huge percentages of them hold truly un-American, anti-liberal, anti-women, anti-gay beliefs. Listen to what these muslims say themselves: 13% percent of Syrian refugees support ISIS, another 10% have mixed feelings about it. Source: Arab Center for Research and Policy Studies http://english.dohainstitute.or…

Religious flamewars are not welcome here (nor prepared lists of religious flamewar talking points). We warned you about this at least once before. If you do it again, we will ban you. We detached this comment from https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13515321 and marked it off-topic.

That was not a prepared list of talking points. I just searched for the fresh polls that support my argument.

Of course, I understand your desire to censor me, since you don't have an actual counter-argument.

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

#192

Post by nerfhammer »

rashkov wrote: post #188
nerfhammer wrote: post #167

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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

Someone else in this thread pointed out that the headlines would be really bad for Uber if they said something like "Uber surges 500% while breaking airport taxi strike". It seems like they were trying to cover themselves, while not outright joining the strike, as if to triangulate towards the center.

If you mean the third option was to disable all service from JFK?

Though I don't think the regular taxi companies or Lyft did that either.

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

#193

Post by scarmig »

magarathea wrote: post #159
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 have heard this called racist a few times and at risk of sounding like a pedant or an apologist I respectfully object. Creating abusive policy targeted at people from certain countries seems xenophobic, isolationist, draconian, cruel, stupid. Racism is a far more evil concept than any of those. Abusing and rationalizing the abuse of people because you have made a generalization based on their geography, ideology or…

Question: when the USA refused to take in many Jewish refugees from Hitler's Germany, was that merely isolationist and cruel? Or racist too? After all, anti-Semitism was rife in the 1930's USA--plenty of businessmen like Henry Ford were more than happy to republish the Protocols of the Elders of Zion, which certainly played a role in American willingness to help the Jews.

Or does it even matter? I don't see how you can try to create a ranking of "minor evil" or "far more evil."

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

#194

Post by [deleted] »

awolf wrote: post #25
rashkov wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think there's a pro-Uber case to be made here. Uber suspended surge pricing at a time when many people were trying to get to the protest at the airport, and while the airtrain was shut down which is what connects the subway system to the airport. Furthermore Uber offered to compensate its drivers who are affected by the ban, if they get stuck outside of the country. Edit: Maybe Uber mis-stepped by honoring requests…

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.

[deleted]

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

#195

Post by grzm »

anjc wrote: post #187
grzm wrote: post #183

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It depends on the purpose of the company. Companies have purposes beyond simply increasing shareholder value: they have goals as to how they're going to run their business, which the board understands. I don't know what the details are in this case. But the argument that everything boils down to pure, unrestrained pursuit of profit is ultimately hollow and soulless and results in all manner of abuses.

Yeah absolutely. I'm guessing that "Oppose Trump" isn't in the memorandum of association though. I'm putting myself into the shoes of a large investor who isn't getting returns.

I don't think it's fair to describe Lyft's donation and letter as broadly as "Oppose Trump". The letter clearly addresses "Trump closed the country’s borders to refugees, immigrants, and even documented residents from around the world based on their country of origin.… We stand firmly against these actions".

I agree I don't know what's in the memorandum of association. It likely doesn't specifically mention immigration issues, either. It may include language concerning ethics and human rights, which Lyft could choose to interpret as including this action. I think reasonable people can disagree on this.

I recognize that now includes two hypotheticals, so I'll stop there as ignorant speculation degenerates quickly.

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

#196

Post by tacomonstrous »

jakeogh wrote: post #190
3JPLW wrote: post #178

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's a Muslim ban when it affects majority-Muslim countries and has a minority exemption. That's pretty clear to me.

The top 6 countries [1] with the highest Muslim populations are not (temp) banned, yet somehow it's a "Muslim Ban". [1] http://www.pewforum.org/2015/04/02/muslims/pf_15-04-02_proje...

This is semantics. It was imposed with the intention of being a Muslim ban, but with plausible deniability. See Giuliani's comments here: http://nypost.com/2017/01/29/trump-asked-me-how-to-legally-c...

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

#197

Post by nerfhammer »

jakeogh wrote: post #161
justinpombrio wrote: post #112

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

"Rudy Giuliani said Donald Trump came to him for guidance on implementing a so-called “Muslim ban” and from that, he helped construct the controversial order crippling international travel from predominantly Muslim countries."

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/politics/rudy-giuliani-trump...

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

#198

Post by anjc »

grzm wrote: post #195
anjc wrote: post #187

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah absolutely. I'm guessing that "Oppose Trump" isn't in the memorandum of association though. I'm putting myself into the shoes of a large investor who isn't getting returns.

I don't think it's fair to describe Lyft's donation and letter as broadly as "Oppose Trump". The letter clearly addresses "Trump closed the country’s borders to refugees, immigrants, and even documented residents from around the world based on their country of origin.… We stand firmly against these actions". I agree I don't know what's in the memorandum of association. It likely doesn't specifically mention immigrati…

Yeah I'm only speculating too, so I'll stop also. My main issue was just with a poster saying that they had an obligation to give this donation. It's really only an obligation to fund social issues if that's what their company was, effectively, somewhat set up to do.

There's every chance that this haphazard donation could blow back in their face, in which case someone will be in a spot of bother.

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

#199

Post by throwawaybeta »

imaginenore wrote: post #191
dang wrote: post #158

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Religious flamewars are not welcome here (nor prepared lists of religious flamewar talking points). We warned you about this at least once before. If you do it again, we will ban you. We detached this comment from https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13515321 and marked it off-topic.

That was not a prepared list of talking points. I just searched for the fresh polls that support my argument. Of course, I understand your desire to censor me, since you don't have an actual counter-argument.

Read the welcome page[0]. You broke HN's rules. >"you don't have an actual counter-argument" So, you're just looking for a fight.

[0]news.ycombinator.com/newswelcome.html

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

#200

Post by ujal »

magarathea wrote: post #159
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 have heard this called racist a few times and at risk of sounding like a pedant or an apologist I respectfully object. Creating abusive policy targeted at people from certain countries seems xenophobic, isolationist, draconian, cruel, stupid. Racism is a far more evil concept than any of those. Abusing and rationalizing the abuse of people because you have made a generalization based on their geography, ideology or…

"Abusing and rationalizing the abuse of people because you have made a generalization based on their geography, ideology or culture is certainly wrong." --

What kind of generalization is it though?

Post reply on HN