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

Uber Hit with $650M Employment Tax Bill in New Jersey

news.bloomberglaw.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

241–250 of 288 posts

Re: Uber Hit with $650M Employment Tax Bill in New Jersey

#241

Post by enraged_camel »

manigandham wrote: post #228
enraged_camel wrote: post #212

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>> The drivers wouldn't be driving if they weren't making any money. This might surprise you, but most people are absolutely terrible when it comes to making complex financial decisions involving multiple variable factors over a period of time. The tiny percentage of ride-share drivers who do meticulously keep track of their finances have all said the same thing: at the end of the day, when you factor in everything ,…

Sure people are terrible at decisions but that doesn't mean they're all stupid. I find it hard to believe that all these drivers can't figure out their costs, and everyone I've talked to has been fine with it. The only time I hear complaints that driving isn't worth it is specific trips with traffic or a long dead leg back home, but that's not their entire driving history.

The other possibility you are ignoring is that a lot of those drivers may be aware that they are breaking even or barely making any profit, but may be choosing to continue driving because they love driving, or they love meeting new people, or they simply want to stay busy and be out and about instead of sitting at home and getting bored/depressed.

Basically, I don't buy the "so many people wouldn't continue doing it if they weren't making good money" argument.

Re: Uber Hit with $650M Employment Tax Bill in New Jersey

#242

Post by andy_ppp »

pitaj wrote: post #128
andy_ppp wrote: post #126

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It doesn’t actually break code, it just wraps it on mobile devices differently. Make your window bigger (80 chars) if you want to see full lines. For mobile it’s still more readable than horizontal scrolling code.

> It doesn’t actually break code, it just wraps it on mobile devices differently. I meant it breaks the flow of the code by inserting line breaks. > Make your window bigger (80 chars) if you want to see full lines. For mobile it’s still more readable than horizontal scrolling code. Not all code uses 80 as the standard, many use 100 instead. Regardless, it is not at all true that wrapping is more readable than horizon…

This is a matter of opinion, you see scrolling as better on mobile and I see wrapping as far far better.

Re: Uber Hit with $650M Employment Tax Bill in New Jersey

#243

Post by twobat »

bluecalm wrote: post #48
navigatr wrote: post #4

Jersey City just had a public referendum on short-term rentals that AirBnB spent millions of dollars lobbying against. It's good to see that the both the public and its elected officials are coming up to speed on the realities companies like Uber and AirBnb force upon them by skirting the law.

The difference is that AirBnB makes lives of the neighbors much worse. Is a parasitic business model. Uber just allows for deals between drivers and customers which a lot of people like. Let's have referendum on Uber and see what the results are before lumping those companies together.

As a user of AirBnB accross Europe I did not make anyone's life worse. This is quite an offense. Are there bad people? Sure. But punish them directly. We already have laws for anti-social acts.

Re: Uber Hit with $650M Employment Tax Bill in New Jersey

#244

Post by memmcgee »

manigandham wrote: post #226
koolba wrote: post #218

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Car safety, accepting multiple payment options, refusing pick ups or drop offs to particular neighborhoods, scam pricing... There’s plenty of reasons to have some regulation. What was missing previously wasn’t regulation, it was competition.

And yet, those are all things where unregulated Uber is far better than regulated taxis ever were. Why is that?

What? How are you arriving at that conclusion?

Re: Uber Hit with $650M Employment Tax Bill in New Jersey

#245

Post by manigandham »

enraged_camel wrote: post #241
manigandham wrote: post #228

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sure people are terrible at decisions but that doesn't mean they're all stupid. I find it hard to believe that all these drivers can't figure out their costs, and everyone I've talked to has been fine with it. The only time I hear complaints that driving isn't worth it is specific trips with traffic or a long dead leg back home, but that's not their entire driving history.

The other possibility you are ignoring is that a lot of those drivers may be aware that they are breaking even or barely making any profit, but may be choosing to continue driving because they love driving, or they love meeting new people, or they simply want to stay busy and be out and about instead of sitting at home and getting bored/depressed. Basically, I don't buy the "so many people wouldn't continue doing it…

Do you honestly think that is the majority? That they're doing it for fun? Have you ever driven for Uber? Have you talked to drivers? Why assume they're all irrational or incapable of figuring out what their time is worth?

I have direct experience with hundreds of drivers including many students, retirees, elderly, disabled and my own friends. They all do it because they get paid.

There are thousands of other things they would rather do for fun or to stay busy, not sit in traffic to drive strangers around.

Re: Uber Hit with $650M Employment Tax Bill in New Jersey

#246

Post by russell_h »

memmcgee wrote: post #244
manigandham wrote: post #226

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And yet, those are all things where unregulated Uber is far better than regulated taxis ever were. Why is that?

What? How are you arriving at that conclusion?

Is this a serious question? Did you ever ride in a taxi in the US?

Re: Uber Hit with $650M Employment Tax Bill in New Jersey

#247

Post by manigandham »

memmcgee wrote: post #244
manigandham wrote: post #226

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And yet, those are all things where unregulated Uber is far better than regulated taxis ever were. Why is that?

What? How are you arriving at that conclusion?

Car safety = Uber knows the drivers, has real-time tracking for your entire trip, and lets you call for help quickly and silently. Taxis have none of this, and there are lots of bandit/underground cabs where you have no idea if it's legit.

Payment options/scams = Uber lets you pay however you want through the app/apple pay without any need for cash, with an upfront price. Most taxis only accept cash, have unclear pricing that you only know at the end, can easily pad the meter in various ways, and may extort you if you really need a ride.

Refusing pickups = Uber drivers don't know the destination until you get in the car, and get kicked off the network if they cancel too many rides or abuse riders. Taxis are notorious for ignoring people based on looks, destination, convenience and usually won't deal with any trip they deem is not worth their time.

The difference in service and safety is magnitudes better with ridesharing vs taxis, that's why they're so popular.

Re: Uber Hit with $650M Employment Tax Bill in New Jersey

#248

Post by PaulRobinson »

manigandham wrote: post #166
xenocyon wrote: post #109

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You make reference to protecting mass transit as well as to the cost to consumers. These arguments make sense if there are zero externalities, but unfortunately there are: carbon footprint, both directly as well as second order effects from increased congestion, commercial exploitation of subsidized infrastructure, increased collision risk to cyclists and vulnerable road users, abuse of contract law by preventing ind…

Regulation is what made taxis so terrible. We don't need the government to control everything. Many of the externalities you describe would be the same if people just drove their own cars. If ridesharing is so bad then govt should invest in proper public transport to create more choice, not try and crush a valuable service used by millions.

Perhaps government would invest in proper public transport if so many businesses weren't trying to figure out ways to avoid taxes by, say, insisting a huge number of people who contract full-time and long-term for them aren't really employees?

Re: Uber Hit with $650M Employment Tax Bill in New Jersey

#249

Post by manigandham »

symkat wrote: post #237
manigandham wrote: post #221

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Those passengers would be in a car anyway. They don't stop going places. Like I said, ridesharing either reduces cars on the road or decreases the amount of parked cars for the same amount of people. The biggest study was in SF and was inherently flawed by looking at traffic over years. It's obvious that an increasing population will generate more traffic, and Uber has allowed more people to travel than before. Servi…

> Those passengers would be in a car anyway. They don't stop going places. Are you sure? 100% of riders, for all rides they take, would choose to use a car if they could not use ride sharing? Absolutely none would walk, ride a bike, take a bus, take a train, choose not to go? I have a hard time believing that it's purely a "car I have access to or a ride share," 100% of the time. So I believe some amount of rides are…

Obviously not 100% but that would be a minority of rides. If you need a car to get to your destination then you either drive or use another car option (like Uber or taxis). Uber is too expensive (and sometimes too slow) to replace other choices for equivalent distances all the time. It's likely used in situations like rain or emergencies or something else. And people who had no options before or lacked last mile reach can now use Uber so of course there's net new riders too.

Uber will add to traffic but traffic always increases anyway. Check any city over any period of time. It's normal. Uber isn't the problem, it's the lack of capacity for a growing population and other viable transportation. For example, look at electric scooters and bikes in big cities that people are using for medium distances instead of cars. That's what happens when there's progress and competition instead of regressive regulation.

Re: Uber Hit with $650M Employment Tax Bill in New Jersey

#250

Post by novok »

nemo44x wrote: post #67
bcrosby95 wrote: post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

When compared to other states, CA has a middle of the road per capita budget. It's not much more than Washington - which actually has zero income tax. CA has a high income tax rate, but property taxes aren't that high - they're pretty average for the nation. And the effective property tax rate is even lower due to prop 13. You can actually search this on many property tax websites - on average the effective tax rate…

Yeah I've read that CA is fairly nervous about another big tech crash as so much of their revenue right now is related to IPO's and stock awards that are worth a lot.

Laws like AB5 & the CCPA doesn't help them in that regard.
Post reply on HN