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

An ‘Uber for garbage’ picks up steam, and $11.7M in Series A funding

techcrunch.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

161–170 of 283 posts

Re: An ‘Uber for garbage’ picks up steam, and $11.7M in Series A funding

#161

Post by enraged_camel »

JumpCrisscross wrote: post #88
dullgiulio wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It really is bad government. The city council should make a tender and have the local utility come and collect big items for free. That's how it works in the European city I come from. And the utility taxes are all but high.

> The city council should...have the local utility come and collect big items for free I don't produce lots of big trash. Not sure why I--nor anybody else--should subsidise people who produce lots of big trash.

My house has never had a fire, so why should I pay for a fire department in my neighborhood?

That's what your argument basically boils down to.

Obviously it's not in our collective best interest to have trash accumulate on the streets. So we all end up paying for it collectively, regardless of how much we consume the service as individuals.

Re: An ‘Uber for garbage’ picks up steam, and $11.7M in Series A funding

#162

Post by apendleton »

enraged_camel wrote: post #159
Tharkun wrote: post #90

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I pay roughly a 50% income tax, and in spite of that municipal garbage collection is, well, garbage. Regular waste is easy enough: weekly collection is OK. Larger items which can be incinerated are OK-ish: need to make an appointment two weeks in advance, and pay by weight. Anything else and I'm screwed. I'd like to get rid of a metal ladder, but it can't be incinerated. I'm supposed to take it to a municipal recycli…

>>I pay roughly a 50% income tax, and in spite of that municipal garbage collection is, well, garbage. No one pays 50% of their income as tax. That is not how tax brackets work. Furthermore, the overwhelming majority of income tax goes to the federal government.

Even with a bracket system, your effective tax rate will asymptotically approach the percentage of the highest bracket as you make more and more money. Given "centre," I assume this person doesn't live in the US, and many places have higher tax brackets than the US does, including some well in excess of 50%. Also they may not have a federal vs. local distinction, etc., etc.

Re: An ‘Uber for garbage’ picks up steam, and $11.7M in Series A funding

#163

Post by robotresearcher »

enraged_camel wrote: post #159
Tharkun wrote: post #90

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I pay roughly a 50% income tax, and in spite of that municipal garbage collection is, well, garbage. Regular waste is easy enough: weekly collection is OK. Larger items which can be incinerated are OK-ish: need to make an appointment two weeks in advance, and pay by weight. Anything else and I'm screwed. I'd like to get rid of a metal ladder, but it can't be incinerated. I'm supposed to take it to a municipal recycli…

>>I pay roughly a 50% income tax, and in spite of that municipal garbage collection is, well, garbage. No one pays 50% of their income as tax. That is not how tax brackets work. Furthermore, the overwhelming majority of income tax goes to the federal government.

"The Personal Income Tax Rate in Sweden stands at 57.10 percent. Personal Income Tax Rate in Sweden averaged 56.31 percent from 1995 until 2016, reaching an all time high of 61.40 percent in 1996 and a record low of 51.50 percent in 2000."

source: https://tradingeconomics.com/sweden/personal-income-tax-rate

Re: An ‘Uber for garbage’ picks up steam, and $11.7M in Series A funding

#164

Post by icantdrive55 »

pdelbarba wrote: post #131
usrusr wrote: post #112

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think that "(no idea what the margin is)" is what OP meant by running the numbers. Mostly a "pamper early adopters with VC money" operation I think, possibly with a profitability story (that may or may not turn out to be realistic) centered around high real estate value areas: in those places where the ground occupied by a gas pump and its accompanying infrastructure plays a significant role in the local fuel…

I don't disagree at all. My numbers should be in the ballpark but generous. If someone has more data sources they can link to, fire away. I think the real takeaway here is that even at ~$400 per 25 cars refueled, it's not a super great market to be in. It's also kind of like starting a printing company during the 21st century (cough cough Vista Print). Yes, there's a sliver of margin to be had with aggressive automat…

And there will be a service that plugs the car in.

I have a feeling the future economy in America will be assisting the wealthy in some capacity. We're almost there?

It's all cool until we're the ones plugging in Biff's Chevy?

(Not in a good mood today. Crime on hn--I know. Probally a bad example. Even Biff could position his vechicle over an induction type charger build into the floor of the garage. "Oh no, Biff thinks the EMF's are affecting his health?" Hire a peon to park vechicle on my todo list? That's an app? I shouldn't even mention EMF. And no--I don't believe they cause problems. But then again not completely sure. Disregard this entire post. Just a bad mood.)

Re: An ‘Uber for garbage’ picks up steam, and $11.7M in Series A funding

#165

Post by bolasanibk »

pmalynin wrote: post #17
t0mbstone wrote: post #10

Startup ideas inspired by Always Sunny in Philadelphia? http://itsalwayssunny.wikia.com/wiki/The_Gang_Recycles_Their... What's next? An Uber-like service that will deliver gasoline directly to your car that is parked in your driveway? Hmm... Come to think of it, that would actually be pretty sweet. I would never have to stop and fill up my gas tank! It would just always be full! A gas delivery truck would come in the…

http://www.filld.com/

And https://www.trybooster.com/

Re: An ‘Uber for garbage’ picks up steam, and $11.7M in Series A funding

#167

Post by rubidium »

warent wrote: post #117
degenerate wrote: post #103

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You do, it's called throw it in the front yard. Anything metal will be picked up and melted down for $ by junk seekers. Used motor oil, insulation, car batteries, and other toxic stuff, I could see a door service being useful.

There are plenty of neighborhoods where you'll be fined by the HOA for doing that. Just "tossing in the front yard" isn't a feasible sustainable solution. Anyway if he's paying 50% in income taxes then it's unlikely he even lives in a neighborhood where junk collectors drive around

At 50% tax bracket that's exactly the neighborhood scrappers want to be in. Only problem is if it's a gated community. Then you have to pay for what the rest of us (who actually rub shoulders with the world) get for free :)

Re: An ‘Uber for garbage’ picks up steam, and $11.7M in Series A funding

#169

Post by exclusiv »

simonsarris wrote: post #54
jelder wrote: post #5

This is great but what if, hold on, we paid taxes.

Many towns in New Hampshire with spread out population do not want to pay for garbage pickup. Everyone brings everything to the dump themselves. These people "self-uber for garbage" as they say. Some rich folks pay companies like Waste Management to do it for them. What's wrong with that model?

Makes sense and I've seen it in mountain & destination communities where a lot of the trash is from transients. However, it's possible that could lead to people not disposing of trash properly or burning it. My grandma used to burn her trash when she lived on a farm.

Re: An ‘Uber for garbage’ picks up steam, and $11.7M in Series A funding

#170

Post by JumpCrisscross »

enraged_camel wrote: post #161
JumpCrisscross wrote: post #88

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The city council should...have the local utility come and collect big items for free I don't produce lots of big trash. Not sure why I--nor anybody else--should subsidise people who produce lots of big trash.

My house has never had a fire, so why should I pay for a fire department in my neighborhood? That's what your argument basically boils down to. Obviously it's not in our collective best interest to have trash accumulate on the streets. So we all end up paying for it collectively, regardless of how much we consume the service as individuals.

I have less control over whether my house lights on fire than if I make lots of trash. Also, if my house starts burning, it's an immediate threat to my neighbours' safety. If I leave trash outside, it's a less-immediate threat to their comfort.

Economically, clean streets are non-rivalrous (my clean street costs little more than my neighbor's) and retroactively excludable (through fines). This makes it a public enterprise good, akin to mail or trains [1].

Case in point: mattress and A/C sellers in New York City dispose of your old mattress or A/C for you. If pick-up of such things were free, fewer would do that. One response might be to regulate every thing one might purchase that could produce big trash. The other is to just make people who choose to make big trash pay for it.

[1] http://www.pitt.edu/~upjecon/MCG/MICRO/GOVT/Pubgood.html

Post reply on HN