Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

pickleer t1_j3enrjg wrote

Horseshit. Taxi drivers pay the dues to cart us around and taxi companies provide the local accountability uber shirks. Gig workers don't jump through any of the hoops or meet regulation like taxi drivers, so you're getting less product and the economy get less gears grinding along. Your short-term comforts feed a corporation at their and all of our expense. Oh, and this to a corporation that has always told us and their drivers that they're working towards driver-free rides, fuck everyone BUT them. I mean, if that's you, take that ride but...

0

tribefan_12 t1_j3escmf wrote

The “regulations” taxi drivers have to meet is paying bullshit medallion fees so people can’t afford them and it pushes wages up and they can operate as a cartel

Uber gives MORE product and is more efficient so better for the economy overall.

Driver free rides would be great. Why wouldn’t you support that?

7

lexartifex t1_j3ete14 wrote

They read too many NY times slam pieces authored and paid for by the NYC taxi cartel and their government shills

3

pickleer t1_j3f2s5n wrote

This starts in NYC but it's gonna affect every city. And it's JUST a start. Macroeconomics gonna bite you us when an entire class (pro drivers) get put on the street.

0

pickleer t1_j3eyy1y wrote

Because it removes an income stream from some of our fellow citizens, dragging down quality of life and the economy for all through knock-on effects. Don't mistake me- I'm not the conversational type but I'll happily put up with a chatty taxi driver that put in the work to get the job with a locally-accountable company. This driver can legibly calculate and predict his wages, feed his family (versus go on welfare or worse), and pay his taxes. Just me in the car is selfish transportation, a single usage of the vehicle carbon expenditures where double use used to be the norm. My comfort is a selfish consideration if it cuts all those drivers out of the economy. And NO, not everyone can retrain.

−1

tribefan_12 t1_j3fc1m5 wrote

What? But customers save money, get the exact same product, and can direct that money towards other people in the economy. It’s a more efficient use. By your logic, we should create a law that doubles the price of everything to help the economy.

2

pickleer t1_j3fcm4s wrote

Ride sharing creates a barrier to employment- you gotta be able to afford the vehicle and its upkeep. Taxis aren't like that.

−1

tribefan_12 t1_j3fd57p wrote

What???? To drive a taxi you need to buy a license that costs $250,000. You don’t know what you’re talking about

2

pickleer t1_j3fdk88 wrote

The drivers work to pay that off in most companies. uber requires the vehicle, a nice vehicle and insurance up front.

2

tribefan_12 t1_j3ff4w1 wrote

Which… most people have and are using anyway

0

pickleer t1_j3ffm4g wrote

So why do we have taxis or ride sharing then? You're thinking from a restricted point of view.

2

tribefan_12 t1_j3fgqcq wrote

Because people don’t always have their cars with them or they want to drink lmao. That doesn’t mean they don’t have them period

1

pickleer t1_j3ftxsn wrote

So which way are you arguing? Most people have them or not?

1

tribefan_12 t1_j3gztxh wrote

Most people do, but they don’t always have them on them. How is this hard for you?

1