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

Uber CEO says its service will probably shut down temporarily in California

cnbc.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

321–330 of 887 posts

Re: Uber CEO says its service will probably shut down temporarily in California

#321

Post by icebraining »

stingraycharles wrote: post #88
mixedCase wrote: post #84

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ok. Uber closes down because it's not lucrative anymore. Drivers are out of a job. Are they better off having no income?

Of course not, that’s the “hostage” part of the grandparent. I’m saying that taxi drivers and delivery services were better off before being “disrupted”. And I’m not talking about CA per se, but generally all western countries Uber operates in. They may have a case in developing nations, I am not very familiar with the systems over there pre-Uber so I can’t comment on that.

Why were taxi drivers better off? They were also generally not considered employees (in the US). If anything, the appearance of Uber appears to have spurred some action in defence of taxi drivers, long ignored and kept out of the Fair Labor Standards Act and other legislation to protect the rights of workers.

In fact, for example in NYC, they generally had to pay to work, by being forced to rent cars from medallion owners like the charming Evgeny Freidman (aka Taxi King, formerly an owner of 900 cabs, now a convicted felon).

"The average rate a cabbie paid to take a taxi out for a 12-hour shift climbed 11 percent, to about $85, between 1990 and 1993, based on the most recent figures available from the city's Taxi and Limousine Commission. But meter revenue remained steady during the same period. As a result, the average income of drivers was about $19,000 in 1993, the same as in 1986 and less than in the peak years that immediately followed, taxi commission studies show."

https://www.nytimes.com/1995/04/09/nyregion/driving-a-taxi-d...

Re: Uber CEO says its service will probably shut down temporarily in California

#322

Post by twblalock »

vkou wrote: post #294
Grimm1 wrote: post #283

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Except these are adults of sound mind willingly entering into the agreement. I absolutely loathe these types of arguments first because its false equivalence and secondly, because why do you know better than the Freelance Journalists who were hurt by this? Stop nannying.

Adults of sound mind enter into all sorts of highly regulated agreements, starting from employment, to tenancy, to gym memberships, to even things like marriages [1]. The reason for why all those agreements are highly regulated isn't because they adults entering them are not of sound mind. The reason for it is that there is often a large imbalance of power between the two parties in the contract. This kind of regulat…

That's a pretty generic argument. We all know the government creates regulations.

Why are you defending AB5 specifically? Why is this specific regulation good? Keep in mind that it has had a lot of negative, unintended side effects already.

Re: Uber CEO says its service will probably shut down temporarily in California

#324

Post by manfredo »

nostoc wrote: post #245
manfredo wrote: post #203

Earlier quoted context omitted.

1) Uber drivers are totally at liberty to set their own hours, and drive in location of their choice ( destination are chosen by Uber, but a worker is at liberty to drive in San Jose one day and San Francisco the next). 2) The drivers are outside of Uber's business. Uber is a software and technology company, not a taxi service. 3) Drivers are independent workers, in business for themselves. 4) Same as above. With the…

> The drivers are outside of Uber's business. Uber is a software and technology company, not a taxi service. That is some serious mental gymnastic.

No, it's not. Is Apple in the business of producing records because it runs iTunes? No, it's in the business of software (and hardware), and some of that software is used to sell music.

Trying to claim that a software service to run a marketplace to sell X is the same thing as actually running a business of building or doing X takes some mental gymnastics.

Re: Uber CEO says its service will probably shut down temporarily in California

#325

Post by jamiequint »

gamblor956 wrote: post #307
jamiequint wrote: post #266

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> in every country uber operated/operates in they are against the law. Wrong > Uber specifically displays the current problem with new startups, they don't make things more effective, or cheaper. Wrong ( https://www.businessinsider.com/uber-vs-taxi-pricing-by-city... and even more since then with Uber X expansion)

Back in 2014...when they were using billions of VC funding to undercut taxi rates. Uber hasn't been that cheap in years. Uber is now roughly the same or more than using a taxi in LA, and that doesn't even include Uber's original and more expensive black car service.

Wrong again.

https://www.uber.com/us/en/price-estimate/ versus http://www.lacitycab.com/rates/

Try it

Re: Uber CEO says its service will probably shut down temporarily in California

#326

Post by manfredo »

Klinky wrote: post #246
manfredo wrote: post #146

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The question being posed isn't wrong, it's just incomplete: > "What worker doesn't want to have unemployment insurance at a time of Covid-19 crisis? What worker doesn't want to know that they'll get paid for overtime if they work 60 hours in a week or 12 hours in a day? What workers wouldn't trade their ability to set their own hours for these benefits? " The answer, as it turns out, is a lot of workers.

Desperation doesn't mean it's good.

Plenty of people were driving for Uber and Lyft before the pandemic when unemployment was low and real wages were growing. The notion that people were predominantly driving for Uber and Lyft out of desperation does not hold up to scrutiny.

This thread is being rate limited reply in edit:

These drivers aren't slaves. Out if all their work options they chose ride share. Now, their options are likely going to be strictly worse. The "bar" might be low from your perspective, but it was the best option these workers. How do you think their situation is improved by eliminating (or drastically altering by removing the ability of drivers to set their own hours) this option?

Re: Uber CEO says its service will probably shut down temporarily in California

#327

Post by icebraining »

Fargren wrote: post #217
cft wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I applaud the CEO for this decision. It forces at least a glimpse of understanding on the local voters that one cannot combine ideological utopia and a functional economy.

> one cannot combine ideological utopia and a functional economy. And still we should try. It's not like California didn't have a functional economy before Uber. Sometimes it's right to make sacrifices in order to uphold our ideas.

AB5 is broader than Uber, and didn't exist before it.

Re: Uber CEO says its service will probably shut down temporarily in California

#328

Post by zepto »

thewebcount wrote: post #206
xyzzy_plugh wrote: post #152

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> California, including especially the Bay Area, LA, and San Diego, has public transportation You really had me for a moment until I realized you're joking :) In all seriousness, public transportation in California is the real joke. > It is possible to visit every major city and national park in CA using just public transportation. Sure, and it's possible for me to canoe to Antarctica but it's not a reasonable way fo…

With LA you might have a point. We have it but it's young and still growing and not as convenient as it should be. But SF? Are you kidding me? I can take busses, trains, etc. to get anywhere in that city and out to the valley. It's awesome!

Either you aren’t being serious or you just haven’t lived in a city with real public transport.

You can get to a lot of places in the Bay Area by public transport, but the time penalty for doing and the number of services you have to use is absurd outside of downtown SF. Typically 3x driving and upwards.

Compare this to New York, or London or Amsterdam, where it can be close to parity, or on the 1-2x range. (I mention these because I have), and you’ll realize that Bay Area public transport is effectively non-existent.

Re: Uber CEO says its service will probably shut down temporarily in California

#329

Post by nilsbunger »

SilasX wrote: post #313
nilsbunger wrote: post #223

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is about pushing voters to approve Prop 22 in november. If Lyft follows suit, it will definitely put a spotlight on the issue!

Hadn't heard of that and had to look it up. To save anyone else the time, apparently Prop 22 is a one that (as best I understand) would reverse AB 5 specifically for app-based driving apps, which seems really narrow and preferential, even by the standards of CA propositions. Here's the Ballotpedia: https://ballotpedia.org/California_Proposition_22,_App-Based...

AB5 is already a mess of these kinds of exemptions. Prop 22 just proposes another.

Re: Uber CEO says its service will probably shut down temporarily in California

#330

Post by free_rms »

Grimm1 wrote: post #283
ianmobbs wrote: post #255

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is akin to saying the Fair Labor Standards Act was a "bad law" because it ended child labor, which I'm sure also caused a temporary "net loss of jobs, economic activity, and civic engagement"

Except these are adults of sound mind willingly entering into the agreement. I absolutely loathe these types of arguments first because its false equivalence and secondly, because why do you know better than the Freelance Journalists who were hurt by this? Stop nannying.

This argument has been made against every single expansion of worker rights in American history.

When the dust settles, business carries on just fine while we get to enjoy things like a 40-hour week with overtime pay if the employer needs more, safety regulations, sick leave, etc.

Post reply on HN