Earlier quoted context omitted.
> the way Uber is set up, there's absolutely no reason for Kalanick to give an Eff about the driver's situation. Except, you know, "being a human" > loyalty cuts both ways. Uber drivers can immediately drop Uber and simply work for Lyft. They have complete and utter independence from the Uber company. That's actually not that different from being an employee, where you can usually quit on short notice and start worki…
I don't know whether we need unions or not - but until we do, Uber can hardly be faulted for playing the free market. The CEO has a board to answer to and they care about maximizing profits, like any other for profit organization.
...and ignoring that Uber is structured specifically to make the board toothless – proof: major VCs invested in Uber have to resort to public blog posts because they can't get answers nor actions using the standard tools of corporate governance...
...there's nothing wrong with faulting people for immoral but legal actions they take. Uber and its ilk are inflicting harm on the lower middle class by driving down the income and security of taxi drivers. The spoils go to middle-class customers (now) and VCs (theoretically, someday). Is that a good deal for society overall? Nobody knows. Wal-mart has similarly driven down prices and arguably made life easier for many people. It's also killed Main Street, created an underclass of employees earning minimum wage, and led to the consolidation of power within oligopolies in many markets.
It's not a sustainable solution because boycotts and other means of regulating companies without the power of law just don't work. But there's nothing wrong with it. In fact, it's probably a necessary on the way to actual regulation by laws.