Uber CEO Indicted in South Korea Over Its Taxi Service • Hacker News Board

Re: Uber CEO Indicted in South Korea Over Its Taxi Service

#141

Post by jfoster » Wed, Dec 24, 2014, 10:14 PM UTC

0x0 wrote: post #20

jfoster wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Of course they could. This is about revenue. Governments don't make nearly as much money from Uber as they do from taxis. There's the licensing factor, but there's also the way the service is taxed. UberX drivers pay personal income tax, but in most cases are probably not companies, so they probably don't pay company tax. Even Uber's cut of each ride probably isn't recorded as revenue of the local Uber entity, assumi…

Many places tax personal income much more heavily than company income, so I'm not sure that argument is universal.

Taxi companies pay both.

Re: Uber CEO Indicted in South Korea Over Its Taxi Service

#142

Post by Hytosys » Thu, Dec 25, 2014, 12:08 AM UTC

totony wrote: post #132

DanielBMarkham wrote: post #86

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I believe you are grouping "those who don't have the skills or abilities" as one unit. Seems like a very large container to be making decisions about. Let's exclude those who cannot learn enough to function in society. If anybody wants these people to starve, I haven't met them. Suppose you graduate from college with a degree in repairing fax machines. Fax machines are quickly disappearing. Should you: 1) Continue to…

I don't want to sound rude or heartless, but, about "Let's exclude those who cannot learn enough to function in society. If anybody wants these people to starve, I haven't met them", I am curious as to why one would choose to support them, if they serve no purpose to society?

I think to say that humans must serve a purpose in society based on their ability to make money is dangerously utilitarian. As it stands, I'd guess at least 20% of adults in America (shot in the dark) do not make any money and rely on others for food and shelter. These people are kept out of harm, and their safe mental state keeps other people out of harm. They can offer community service, familial or household care, and plenty of other things that do not profit them any cash. Most importantly, these people are spouses, parents, children, and grandchildren. They offer emotion and humility.

I know it seems like I'm doing my best to assert your rudeness or heartlessness, but I'm just trying to raise the point that one's monetary value is not wholly representative of their value in society.

Re: Uber CEO Indicted in South Korea Over Its Taxi Service

#143

Post by username223 » Thu, Dec 25, 2014, 4:24 AM UTC

wozniacki wrote: post #91

justin66 wrote: post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> seem to always serve the interests of just the union members and in no particular way improve the experience of the consumers. Serving the interests of the union members - representing them in their negotiations with management, to be precise - is a union's reason for being. They might also hold their members to a standard of professional ethics, depending on the union, and that might or might not benefit you as a…

"...that might or might not benefit you as a consumer, but that's not the immediate goal." "You're focused on the wrong thing vis a vis unions. They are there for the workers, that might or might not play out well for the consumer." Bah Humbug! Then why am I - as the consumer - should want to foster the growth and strengthening of unions? To create another entrenched interest group whose influence I cannot hope to co…

> Then why am I - as the consumer - should want to foster the growth and strengthening of unions?

WUT? Do you play any other role in society than that of consumer? Worker, maybe?

Perhaps you're a Titan of Industry, or a self-employed tinkerer, but society depends on big projects (think about the roads you use...), which require big organizations, which have many more workers than bosses. As consumers, those workers may not support unions, but as workers, I'll bet quite a few do.

Re: Uber CEO Indicted in South Korea Over Its Taxi Service

#144

Post by nyc640 » Thu, Dec 25, 2014, 9:25 AM UTC

TheHypnotist wrote: post #85

67726e wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I hope they unionize and demand higher wages. Higher costs for human drivers will increase the incentive for driver-less cars, right?

As a resident of New Jersey, please, no more unions.

I find it amazing how well working-class unions have been demonized in modern American society. Especially when this[1] is happening. There was a comment on another post a few days/weeks ago about how the AMA and bar associations are basically unions for professionals that have avoided this demonization and that the software industry ought to consider something similar to prevent the fixing of wages and the depressing of wages using foreign workers. If such unionization directly benefited you, would you be in support of it then? (honest question)

[1] http://www.economist.com/blogs/graphicdetail/2014/11/daily-c...

Re: Uber CEO Indicted in South Korea Over Its Taxi Service

#145

Post by totony » Thu, Dec 25, 2014, 8:18 PM UTC

Hytosys wrote: post #142

totony wrote: post #132

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't want to sound rude or heartless, but, about "Let's exclude those who cannot learn enough to function in society. If anybody wants these people to starve, I haven't met them", I am curious as to why one would choose to support them, if they serve no purpose to society?

I think to say that humans must serve a purpose in society based on their ability to make money is dangerously utilitarian. As it stands, I'd guess at least 20% of adults in America (shot in the dark) do not make any money and rely on others for food and shelter. These people are kept out of harm, and their safe mental state keeps other people out of harm. They can offer community service, familial or household care,…

I wasn't asserting that money is the determining factor in asserting one's purpose.

I was relating to the parent's point that some people cannot learn to function in society. These people couldn't offer things such as community service and some of them might be so separated from society from their handicap as to not have any one caring for them except the government agencies in charge of them.

Re: Uber CEO Indicted in South Korea Over Its Taxi Service

#146

Post by PKop » Sat, Dec 27, 2014, 6:42 PM UTC

prostoalex wrote: post #120

briandear wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I am not arguing this point on licenses or no licenses, however I would say that assuming the client has provided an informed consent, then the client should be allowed to use whatever car service they want. If I hitchhike, I assume the risk with no expectation of protection. Consumers should have a right to use whatever they want -- provided they are aware of what they are consuming. However the odd thing about Uber…

> assuming the client has provided an informed consent How would the client be informed on issues such as * proper vehicle maintenance records * prior criminal record * history of accidents and insurance claims * presence of proper insurance to cover client's medical costs or property loss costs in case of an accident This is something that is required of properly licensed transportation companies (i.e. anybody worki…

If you ran a taxi service, in a competitive market, would you offer this information to your customers? You know they would want to know about it.

So you would, correct? Probably because you would then earn their business over your competitors, right?

If your answer is no, then why not? What if your competitors did, would you then?

Re: Uber CEO Indicted in South Korea Over Its Taxi Service

#147

Post by TheHypnotist » Tue, Dec 30, 2014, 8:44 PM UTC

nyc640 wrote: post #144

TheHypnotist wrote: post #85

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As a resident of New Jersey, please, no more unions.

I find it amazing how well working-class unions have been demonized in modern American society. Especially when this[1] is happening. There was a comment on another post a few days/weeks ago about how the AMA and bar associations are basically unions for professionals that have avoided this demonization and that the software industry ought to consider something similar to prevent the fixing of wages and the depressin…

Who wouldn't? But for every good thing about unions I can name you a bad. It's a matter of the individual and how they are effected. As an example, look at Camden, NJ. Most of it's industry vacated for other states because union labor in New Jersey is extraordinarily high (and powerful).

Another example, look at the cost of Metlife Stadium vs. whatever the stadium the Cowboys play in now. it's about 30% HIGHER in cost. Again, no fancy gadgets or beach front property, it's in swampland occupied by highways built by union labor.

Unions historically have done great things for workers and continue to do so. However, they have a habit of forcing corporations to move elsewhere and pissing off non-union laborers as a result.