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

181–190 of 288 posts

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

#181

Post by manigandham »

GVIrish wrote: post #179
manigandham wrote: post #166

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

The answer to bad regulations is not necessarily no regulations. The taxi medallion system was broken and in need of an overhaul. Replacing a broken system with a ridesharing Wild West is not optimal. I agree that there needs to be a lot more investment in mass transit but in the meantime governments shouldn't be turning a blind eye to regulating ridesharing.

What's wild west about it? What needs to be regulated exactly vs having people drive their own cars?

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

#182

Post by manigandham »

tasogare wrote: post #177
manigandham wrote: post #166

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

No, taxis are bad because companies try to squeeze the maximum amount of money while providing the least possible service. They could provide a good service within the term of the regulations if it were their focus. Where I live taxis are regulated yet provide a decent/high quality of service. And it’s true even in cities like mine where the public transportation network is crap (bus based).

Taxis got away with it because there was no competition until ridesharing came around. They wouldn't have provided good service on their own when protected by laws.

Nothing has improved commercial services like competition. Nothing has ruined it like regulation. I've yet to hear how any of these externalities are solved with regulation, or how they are unique to ridesharing vs private car ownership.

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

#183

Post by manigandham »

danans wrote: post #180
manigandham wrote: post #166

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

> If ridesharing is so bad then govt should invest in proper public transport to create more choice This is an excellent idea, and is consistent with also taxing any societally borne externalities caused by ride-sharing, the primary being congestion. And taxis should be held to the same regulatory standard.

The congestion would be the same if people just drove on their own. You can see this in Los Angeles and New York. The answer to getting cars off the street (whether private or shared) is to build other options that people can use.

Taxis are cars too by the way. How did all those taxi regulations improve externalities?

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

#184

Post by manigandham »

mirimir wrote: post #171
manigandham wrote: post #169

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How are they getting screwed? Drivers do it by choice, and many of them do have a full-time job or other commitment and like Uber for the flexibility. They specifically don't want a full-time driving job.

From what I've read, they often don't make enough to even cover their increased vehicle expenses. And then there's insurance exposure. Also, TFA notes that classification of drivers as employees would increase costs by over 20%. If that's true, someone here is getting screwed. Drivers, governments, or both. But still, I value freedom highly. So I do get the argument that people ought to have the right to work how the…

Articles are a poor source. The drivers wouldn't be driving if they weren't making any money. I've taken thousands of rides and discussed Uber with about 90% of my drivers. While they all would like to make more money (who wouldn't?), they all make a profit and enjoy the flexibility the most.

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

#185

Post by bamboozled »

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.

There are some crap Taxi's in Tokyo, but on average they're amazing. I'm sure there is still regulation and taxes they need to pay in Japan too.

It's not just because they're Taxis they suck. There is also bad Uber drivers too.

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

#186

Post by colinmhayes »

jdkee wrote: post #167
rsclient wrote: post #93

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Total pension liability (from your numbers): 133.5 billion There are 12.80 million people in Illinois, so the per-person liability is $10429 A typical pension is paid out over the course of about 20 years. The liability per person per year is $521 Put differently: the pension liability per year is 6.675 billion. Illinois rakes in about $45 billion per year in taxes. That's at most "awkward" to handle and at best "eas…

It is almost double the amount cited above, estimated to be $241,000,000,000. https://www.illinoispolicy.org/illinois-241b-pension-debt-st...

IPI is the Cato institute of Illinois. Consistent track record of putting conservative talking points above facts.

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

#187

Post by lovehashbrowns »

listenallyall wrote: post #176
drstewart wrote: post #164

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>The use of medallions was actually to protect the public Imagine believing this. https://slate.com/business/2012/06/taxi-medallions-how-new-y... >The public hasn’t fared much better. Deep-pocketed medallion owners have hijacked public policy through lobbying and legal challenges. Just last week medallion owners won a legal victory blocking Mayor Bloomberg’s plan to create a fleet of “green cabs” to serve New York’s…

This is like the shoe shine boy giving stock tips in 1929, or the stripper with 6 houses in 2008 -- it represents the exact moment of "peak taxicab." Every major point in the story is now invalidated: Medallions being valued over $1 million is a pipe dream today. Today they are worth about 11% of that. https://www.crainsnewyork.com/transportation/mystery-buyer-s... The green cabs exist. Teslas were just approved for…

> But it did provide a functioning cab network that was safe and predictable for decades.

I don't even know what world you're describing right now. With issues like "the credit card machine is down" to a cab never showing up despite how many calls I made.. the last word I'd ever use to describe cabs is "predictable." Even today, post-Uber.

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

#188

Post by derrick_jensen »

xenocyon wrote: post #109
Shivetya wrote: post #40

I am really curious how they arrived at any of the numbers in this article. Seriously, what other large employers make it to hundred plus million per year? Are they just up and deciding that anyone who did one trip is now an employee? Is there a source that shows how much each company pays per year in this state? who else is equivalent? this isn't about protecting the drivers, this is about protecting the taxi indust…

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…

Uber could very easily reduce carbon emissions if they bias their payments/ride assignments towards EVs and other efficient vehicles. I'm not sure about the legality of that, but its definitely an interesting idea if they need to pull some PR shenanigans.

>Commercial exploitation of subsidized infrastructure What makes trucking different than Uber in this scenario? Is driving my own car around not abusing the infrastructure, but hailing an Uber is? Uber doesn't make money if nobody is riding somewhere in the car, so the market forces try and make utilization as efficient as possible.

>Increased collision risk to cyclists and vulnerable road users Are Uber drivers more likely to hit people than non Uber drivers? If you control for the population utilization of the roads, does this have a measurable affect?

>Abuse of contract law by preventing independent rate setting and concealing negotiable information You have a point there, but personally I disagree that these should be required by law in the first place.

>Artificially depressed prices fueled by venture capital in order to create a monopoly and capitalize later Well its doing a pretty bad job if the goal is to create monopolies. For most tech companies, they have a reasonable amount of competitors given the chicken-and-egg situation they need to solve. Prices are artificially depressed, not going to lie, but a lot of prices are artificially depressed to make them usable by the masses, and its all the better for it.

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

#189

Post by thelock85 »

manigandham wrote: post #181
GVIrish wrote: post #179

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The answer to bad regulations is not necessarily no regulations. The taxi medallion system was broken and in need of an overhaul. Replacing a broken system with a ridesharing Wild West is not optimal. I agree that there needs to be a lot more investment in mass transit but in the meantime governments shouldn't be turning a blind eye to regulating ridesharing.

What's wild west about it? What needs to be regulated exactly vs having people drive their own cars?

I’m no fan of unnecessary regulation, but you cannot compare externalities of driving your own car for your own purposes vs. ride share, accept in cases where people are ride share driving in the same capacity/frequency as personal driving. My opinion is that people who drive their own cars don’t do so at the same clip as people driving for money. In the former, people do so out of convenience or routine. In the latter, people do so as long as needed to meet financial obligations. Maybe I’m wrong and people are out here driving hours and hours for wages they don’t need to survive or support others.

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

#190

Post by listenallyall »

lovehashbrowns wrote: post #187
listenallyall wrote: post #176

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is like the shoe shine boy giving stock tips in 1929, or the stripper with 6 houses in 2008 -- it represents the exact moment of "peak taxicab." Every major point in the story is now invalidated: Medallions being valued over $1 million is a pipe dream today. Today they are worth about 11% of that. https://www.crainsnewyork.com/transportation/mystery-buyer-s... The green cabs exist. Teslas were just approved for…

> But it did provide a functioning cab network that was safe and predictable for decades. I don't even know what world you're describing right now. With issues like "the credit card machine is down" to a cab never showing up despite how many calls I made.. the last word I'd ever use to describe cabs is "predictable." Even today, post-Uber.

Carry some freaking cash.

"For decades" -- like, from the 1940s to the 2000s.

Fares were predictable. Still are in fact, they are actually painted on the exterior of the cab itself. Maybe you've noticed?

Post reply on HN