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

Uber Is Dealt a Fresh Blow in European Legal Case

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 81 posts

Re: Uber Is Dealt a Fresh Blow in European Legal Case

#71

Post by CamperBob2 »

Veratyr wrote: post #55
stale2002 wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you really believe this, then why not let consumers decide for themselves which transportation services that they want to use? If all these rules and regulations are so awesome, then consumers will overwhelming choose to buy from companies that follow them. Thats how markets work.

Because individuals won't make decisions that benefit society as a whole. They'll make decisions that benefit themselves and themselves alone. People will simply use whatever's cheapest and easiest without much thought into anything else.

So, all I have to do to impose my will on you is to insist, backed by little to no evidence, that highly-regulated taxis "benefit society" more than less-regulated rideshare services do. Correct?

It seems that the people who determine what does and does not "benefit society" have a significant amount of unwarranted power. If this weren't true, we wouldn't be seeing cases like this one where the people -- the same ones that supposedly make up the democracy in question -- insist on using unauthorized/illegal rideshare services.

If your response to my reasoning is, "Well, it's a democracy after all, they're getting what they voted for," then the contradiction is too obvious to bother pointing out.

Re: Uber Is Dealt a Fresh Blow in European Legal Case

#72

Post by IncRnd »

izacus wrote: post #24
fiatjaf wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So use taxi, if you like it so much. Keeping people "safe" against their will and with money from their own pockets is evil, to say the least.

EU countries are democratic. It's not against people's will.

Your comment highlights the notable problem with democracies. Unfortunately, there isn't much better.

Re: Uber Is Dealt a Fresh Blow in European Legal Case

#73

Post by Veratyr »

CamperBob2 wrote: post #71
Veratyr wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because individuals won't make decisions that benefit society as a whole. They'll make decisions that benefit themselves and themselves alone. People will simply use whatever's cheapest and easiest without much thought into anything else.

So, all I have to do to impose my will on you is to insist, backed by little to no evidence, that highly-regulated taxis "benefit society" more than less-regulated rideshare services do. Correct? It seems that the people who determine what does and does not "benefit society" have a significant amount of unwarranted power. If this weren't true, we wouldn't be seeing cases like this one where the people -- the same one…

My point was intended more as a general one, that you can't simply assume what the market chooses is actually the best choice, as individual market participants have different priorities to the collective.

> So, all I have to do to impose my will on you is to insist, backed by little to no evidence, that highly-regulated taxis "benefit society" more than less-regulated rideshare services do. Correct?

No, the regulations predate Uber. Uber needs to either change the law through lobbying or adhere to it.

> It seems that the people who determine what does and does not "benefit society" have a significant amount of unwarranted power. If this weren't true, we wouldn't be seeing cases like this one where the people -- the same ones that supposedly make up the democracy in question -- insist on using unauthorized/illegal rideshare services.

> If your response to my reasoning is, "Well, it's a democracy after all, they're getting what they voted for," then the contradiction is too obvious to bother pointing out.

What we have isn't democracy, it's representative democracy, which addresses exactly the problem I was originally making. The masses can't be expected to make informed decisions on everything that concerns them, so they elect a few people who can on their behalf.

When an average person decides Uber vs. Taxi, in the 10s or so they spend thinking about it, they're not considering the impact it'll have on the local economy, the safety features of the vehicle, the qualifications the driver is required to have or the regulations they're required to adhere to. All your average person thinks about is that the Uber app is already on their phone, the car will arrive quickly and in the grand scheme of things, the likelihood of something bad happening is small.

Elected representatives will listen to experts, consider the wider impacts of their decision and do their best to make a decision that benefits their constituents. Sometimes that decision will conflict with what their constituents would choose themselves.

Re: Uber Is Dealt a Fresh Blow in European Legal Case

#74

Post by celticninja »

stale2002 wrote: post #50
toomuchtodo wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

anti-worker, anti-customer, anti-morals. Let Uber die by a thousand cuts.

Pro-consumer. Consumers overwhelming support ridesharing because of how cheap it is. Also, if a consumer doesn't like these service, they are free to use any number of other transportation services. That is what this fight is about. Letting consumers decide for themselves which services they prefer.

Here's the thing, you can be pro-consumer without being anti-worker. Uber just haven't figured out how to do that.

Re: Uber Is Dealt a Fresh Blow in European Legal Case

#75

Post by CamperBob2 »

Veratyr wrote: post #73
CamperBob2 wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So, all I have to do to impose my will on you is to insist, backed by little to no evidence, that highly-regulated taxis "benefit society" more than less-regulated rideshare services do. Correct? It seems that the people who determine what does and does not "benefit society" have a significant amount of unwarranted power. If this weren't true, we wouldn't be seeing cases like this one where the people -- the same one…

My point was intended more as a general one, that you can't simply assume what the market chooses is actually the best choice, as individual market participants have different priorities to the collective. > So, all I have to do to impose my will on you is to insist, backed by little to no evidence, that highly-regulated taxis "benefit society" more than less-regulated rideshare services do. Correct? No, the regulati…

And people wonder why a Reagan or a Trump or a Brexit appeals to so many voters.

Just because you can regulate something doesn't mean it's always a net win for society to do so. The EU definitely seems to have missed this particular clue.

Re: Uber Is Dealt a Fresh Blow in European Legal Case

#76

Post by celticninja »

gsnedders wrote: post #41
friedman23 wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My comment was less about this specific ruling and more about the trend. In the US, uber was practically illegal just like Europe. The US made it legal (or looked the other way) while Europe (and much of the rest of the world) decided to clamp down on the service with regulations without ever reflecting on whether the laws themselves were beneficial in the first place. At least in the US, much of the fear mongering o…

Note there's all kinds of regulations affecting taxis in Europe: some have clamped down heavily, and others Uber operates totally above the law in.

Do you mean within the law? Evidently they have acted like they are above the law in most jurisdictions until legal rulings have required them to comply.

Re: Uber Is Dealt a Fresh Blow in European Legal Case

#77

Post by icebraining »

izacus wrote: post #32
friedman23 wrote: post #13

What is the saying, "Cutting off the nose to spite the face"? As Europe continues to add laws and regulations targeted at American tech companies they will further prevent any innovative businesses from growing and thriving in Europe. Also before you respond, I am really not interested in legalist arguments, especially when the laws themselves were designed by and for entrenched interests. It's been 17 years since th…

I think we'll be fine without "innovation" that's innovate exclusively by breaking basic safety and labour laws. Taxi services across EU (at least in my experience) are usually of significanly better quality than those in US. Well, at least I've yet to meet a cab smelling of piss and shit as opposed to SF.

Which basic safety laws have Uber broken in the EU?

Re: Uber Is Dealt a Fresh Blow in European Legal Case

#78

Post by izacus »

icebraining wrote: post #77
izacus wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think we'll be fine without "innovation" that's innovate exclusively by breaking basic safety and labour laws. Taxi services across EU (at least in my experience) are usually of significanly better quality than those in US. Well, at least I've yet to meet a cab smelling of piss and shit as opposed to SF.

Which basic safety laws have Uber broken in the EU?

Depending on the country - requirement for driver to have a commercial driving license, first aid training and more detailed car safety checks required for taxi services.

Re: Uber Is Dealt a Fresh Blow in European Legal Case

#79

Post by k-mcgrady »

stale2002 wrote: post #51
k-mcgrady wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Taxi drivers in my European country are subject to some requirements that make a lot of sense and help keep people safe. I've user Uber a lot and it's great but anything to up the quality of drivers is good. I've been down one way streets multiple times in Uber's, I've been in multiple near-misses, I've never had these things happen to me in taxi's. Not all taxi drivers are great either but the even the bad ones are…

If you really believe this, then why not let consumers decide for themselves which transportation services that they want to use? If all these rules and regulations are so awesome, then consumers will overwhelming choose to buy from companies that follow them. Thats how markets work.

>> Thats how markets work.

No, that's how markets are _supposed_ to work but we don't live in a world of perfect competition where completely free markets work without flaws.

Re: Uber Is Dealt a Fresh Blow in European Legal Case

#80

Post by gsnedders »

celticninja wrote: post #76
gsnedders wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Note there's all kinds of regulations affecting taxis in Europe: some have clamped down heavily, and others Uber operates totally above the law in.

Do you mean within the law? Evidently they have acted like they are above the law in most jurisdictions until legal rulings have required them to comply.

Uh, yes!
Post reply on HN