# ? Bill to Force Uber & Lyft to Pay 75% of the Fare ?



## SurgeMasterMN (Sep 10, 2016)

https://bentcorner.com/law-uber-lyft-drivers-75-percent/


----------



## The Entomologist (Sep 23, 2018)

Some states plain don't care about how Uber takes advantage of it's drivers.

They will sue for that bill or they will add random costs to still come up out of the 25%

I'm not saying they might do the above, they WILL do it, it's expected of them, they are too easy to predict.


----------



## Pax Collector (Feb 18, 2018)

It usually takes one state to do the right thing and the rest will follow suit. Hopefully the bill passes.


----------



## UberBastid (Oct 1, 2016)

I always vote for freedom.
Freedom of Uber to charge pax's what the market bears.
Freedom of Uber to pay drivers what the market bears.

Freedom of drivers to refuse to drive if the pay is not enough.
Freedom of drivers to drive if the pay is enough.

Freedom.

I don't want the government telling me what I have to pay my employees, what the passengers have to pay for a ride, what the drivers can receive for pay.

Freedom. Freedom. Freedom. 
It's not easy being an adult, it comes with responsibilities.
But the rewards are so great that it's worth it.


----------



## SLuz (Oct 20, 2016)

UberBastid said:


> Freedom. Freedom. Freedom.
> It's not easy being an adult, it comes with responsibilities.
> But the rewards are so great that it's worth it.


Well here's hoping you make it to adulthood one day  and realize that problems in society require more analysis and thought than a single word response. `Freedom to own nuclear weapons? freedom to murder? freedom to destroy the environment? freedom to steal cars? Freedom to tell other people what they do is not freedom? freedom from freedom? Freedom to tell companies they can't get more than 75% of a fare? A complex vocabulary of words and ideas were developed by human beings for a reason.


----------



## SurgeMasterMN (Sep 10, 2016)

UberBastid said:


> I always vote for freedom.
> Freedom of Uber to charge pax's what the market bears.
> Freedom of Uber to pay drivers what the market bears.
> 
> ...


----------



## beebob (Apr 9, 2019)

UberBastid said:


> I always vote for freedom.
> Freedom of Uber to charge pax's what the market bears.
> Freedom of Uber to pay drivers what the market bears.
> 
> ...


Agreed ?

? The purpose of government is to safeguard rights,
not regulate business.
?Capitalism works precisely because it allows markets to fail.
?Congress fails precisely because it attempts to regulate markets. ...

?The purpose of government is to safeguard rights, not regulate business?


----------



## SurgeMasterMN (Sep 10, 2016)

beebob said:


> Agreed ?
> 
> ? The purpose of government is to safeguard rights,
> not regulate business.
> ...


Understood ?

Maybe instead of a bill someone can organize a Drivers Club to negotiate pay. Anyone else with ideas cause Uber and Lyft will keep bending us over till we tap out then the industry is left with poor quality drivers and service.

I am a free market capitalist as well but u as a driver have to agree where they started their rate take several years ago and where they are now is ridiculous. I would never argue for my own rate cut so I do not understand your logic other than standing firm on a political point. Hey I voted Trump also and will vote for him again but we need more of the take as drivers.


----------



## UberBastid (Oct 1, 2016)

SLuz said:


> Well here's hoping you make it to adulthood one day  and realize that problems in society require more analysis and thought than a single word response. `Freedom to own nuclear weapons? freedom to murder? freedom to destroy the environment? freedom to steal cars? Freedom to tell other people what they do is not freedom? freedom from freedom? Freedom to tell companies they can't get more than 75% of a fare? A complex vocabulary of words and ideas were developed by human beings for a reason.


Too late to expect adulthood from me ... too late. I'm 66 next month.
And, I been on my own feet and feeding myself for half a century now, I have experience in that matter. I have found that, for humans, freedom is best. Well, most humans anyway.
It is tempting to turn everything over to the government, and let them take care of me. Give me all that free chit: healthcare, food stamps, free child care, education, a phone, a place to live. All free.

One way that people who don't know how to use words or thoughts win arguments is by taking the argument to the extreme - to the absurd. That seems to be the norm these days. Nancy Pelosi and Don Trump are experts at it.

I did NOT say that people should have the freedom to own nukes, or commit murder, or destroy the environment or steal other peoples property. 
I DID say, and still believe that people should be able to make their own decisions about a much as possible; in fact, for me, I insist on that kind of freedom. Militantly insist.

I don't believe that it is the gov't place to inject itself into personal business entered into between consenting adults. The pax gets to decide if he wants to get in my car. I decide if I wanna let him into my car. We agree on the fee for service ... if these negotiations are entered into by consenting adults and an agreement is reached, then I don't need nanny looking over my shoulder.


----------



## Carbuncle (Mar 29, 2019)

beebob said:


> Agreed ?
> 
> ? The purpose of government is to safeguard rights,
> not regulate business.
> ...


Your perspectives on this are naive and childish. Businesses are easily corrupted by their profit motives. Checks and balances are essentIal in all sectors of commerce and society to safeguard the public from nefarious market manipulations.

Uber and Lyft willfully endanger everyone's lives by paying so poorly that drivers cannot be reasonably expected to adequately maintain vehicles, get enough rest, eat well, or get enough exercise.

Decades of research went into determining what a safe floor would be to ensure driver and public safety.

Quality and safety have costs thresholds and business consistently prove willing to go below these thresholds.

The cab industry went unregulated for nearly four decades but conditions deteriorated so severely the government had to act.

This industry has the highest workplace homicide rate in the nation and most countries where it exists.

I suggest you two start doing actual research instead of merely parroting neoliberal, neoconservative, libertarian Kool-Aid.

Always prosecute assumptions and one-size-fits-all "solutions."

And there's no such thing as the "invisible hand of the market." That's a chimera. Any system left to its own devices without guidance doesn't just eat "competition" it eventually eats itself.



SurgeMasterMN said:


> Understood ?
> 
> Maybe instead of a bill someone can organize a Drivers Club to negotiate pay. Anyone else with ideas cause Uber and Lyft will keep bending us over till we tap out then the industry is left with poor quality drivers and service.
> 
> I am a free market capitalist as well but u as a driver have to agree where they started their rate take several years ago and where they are now is ridiculous. I would never argue for my own rate cut so I do not understand your logic other than standing firm on a political point. Hey I voted Trump also and will vote for him again but we need more of the take as drivers.


Any system that denies negotiations to any involved party is not free, it's feudalism.


----------



## UberBastid (Oct 1, 2016)

Carbuncle said:


> You're perspectives on this are naive and childish. Businesses are easily corrupted by their profit motives. Checks and balances are essentIal in all sectors of commerce and society to safeguard the public from nefarious market manipulations.


What the OP opined is agreement with a story that said in its heading that "bill to force Uber to pay drivers 75% ..."
Who is going to enforce that? You? Someone else? Will it be the Department of Rideshare Equlity?
Would it be Uber only? What about Lyft?
Why 75%? Why not 80%? 85%? Which would you rather have?

And, along those lines; how about the gov't forcing my bank to pay me 6% on a savings account? They pay almost zero. Is that fair? We need a law. Yea, lets pass a law.

I haven't seen anyone here suggest that Uber not have safety standards. Is there already gov't agencies that do that? Or, is it only about the money? And, along those lines ... why not 90%?

Viva la capitalism!


----------



## No Prisoners (Mar 21, 2019)

Really trying to stay out of this futile discussion. But just imagine if the government regulates uber and enforces any limits as to what it can charge or pay.
Then where will it stop. 
Should Apple be forced to a limit price of its products. How about GM, or McDonalds, or Chanel. 
The problem with Uber's business model progressively decreasing driver rates is not to be decided by the government. The problem is not Uber. The problem is that drivers take it. 
Look, many times I post comments criticizing Uber. But I have never proposed any government intervention. 
As much as I disagree with Uber's model, I resent any calls for government setting limits.


----------



## BigRedDriver (Nov 28, 2018)

UberBastid said:


> I always vote for freedom.
> Freedom of Uber to charge pax's what the market bears.
> Freedom of Uber to pay drivers what the market bears.
> 
> ...


Free to have a gun put against my head isn't really "freedom" though.


----------



## No Prisoners (Mar 21, 2019)

Anyone asking for uber to be forced to pay drivers 70% does not understand uber's business model. 
I have news for you. Even if Uber kept 70% and paid drivers 30% Uber could never, ever be profitable. Probably break-even around 90%. But then no growth. 
Go ahead and critique me. Maybe some real analysis might open your eyes.


----------



## Molongo (Aug 11, 2018)

No Prisoners said:


> Really trying to stay out of this futile discussion. But just imagine if the government regulates uber and enforces any limits as to what it can charge or pay.
> Then where will it stop.
> Should Apple be forced to a limit price of its products. How about GM, or McDonalds, or Chanel.
> The problem with Uber's business model progressively decreasing driver rates is not to be decided by the government. The problem is not Uber. The problem is that drivers take it.
> ...


"Drivers get 75% of the charge to the pax". There is no mention of gov't regulating what UBER can charge.


----------



## Carbuncle (Mar 29, 2019)

UberBastid said:


> What the OP opined is agreement with a story that said in its heading that "bill to force Uber to pay drivers 75% ..."
> Who is going to enforce that? You? Someone else? Will it be the Department of Rideshare Equlity?
> Would it be Uber only? What about Lyft?
> Why 75%? Why not 80%? 85%? Which would you rather have?
> ...


Like I said, considerable research went into determining a safe floor on pay to reasonably ensure public safety. There are and have long been agencies that regulate this industry.

And when you start down the path of "Why not 80%? 85%? Which would you rather have?" you sound like a child.

Every business has costs it must consider. Uber and Lyft claim drivers are their own businesses yet both companies dictate all of the most critical terms and rob drivers of the ability to factor profits against costs.

The driver contract is a fraudulent document and reads EXACTLY like a contract of adhesion, NOT an IC agreement.

I suggest you read the Borello Test.


----------



## No Prisoners (Mar 21, 2019)

Molongo said:


> "Drivers get 75% of the charge to the pax". There is no mention of gov't regulating what UBER can charge.


Sir I beg to differ. Someone posted this here. Uber took more than 75%.


----------



## beebob (Apr 9, 2019)

Carbuncle said:


> Your perspectives on this are naive and childish. Businesses are easily corrupted by their profit motives. Checks and balances are essentIal in all sectors of commerce and society to safeguard the public from nefarious market manipulations.
> 
> Uber and Lyft willfully endanger everyone's lives by paying so poorly that drivers cannot be reasonably expected to adequately maintain vehicles, get enough rest, eat well, or get enough exercise.
> 
> ...


I guess you're the guy that's Court Ordered to chauffeur Uber's clients.

When rates dropped, I learned a marketable skill and left uber for greener pastures.

Freedom
Ambition
Choice
Opportunity

I have zero sympathy for LAZY Crybabies ?

Low Skill necessitates Low Wage


----------



## UberBastid (Oct 1, 2016)

Carbuncle said:


> And when you start down the path of "Why not 80%? 85%? Which would you rather have?" you sound like a child.


So, whats the answer? "From the mouths of babes", eh?



Carbuncle said:


> The driver contract is a fraudulent document and reads EXACTLY like a contract of adhesion, NOT an IC agreement.


THAT'S a civil matter. Take it to civil court and get a judge to agree with you. 
But, don't sic the gov't on me.
What I'm getting is not worth what I'm giving up.

FREEDOM, FREEDOM, FREEDOM.


----------



## JimD (Oct 25, 2017)

i could not agree more with uberbastid...... and i could not possibly agree one iota less with carbuncle......
still a free country....... )


----------



## Carbuncle (Mar 29, 2019)

beebob said:


> I guess you're the guy that's Court Ordered to chauffeur Uber's clients.
> 
> When rates dropped, I learned a marketable skill and left uber for greener pastures.
> 
> ...


I guess that's why you live on your knees while I stand and deliver, Sponge Bob:


----------



## beebob (Apr 9, 2019)

Carbuncle said:


> I guess that's why you live on your knees while I stand and deliver, Sponge Bob:


I guess you're the guy that's Court Ordered to chauffeur Uber's clients.

When rates dropped, I learned a marketable skill and left uber for greener pastures.

Freedom
Ambition
Choice
Opportunity

I have zero sympathy for LAZY Crybabies ?

Low skill warrants Low Wage

TNC Drivers are Overpaid


----------



## Carbuncle (Mar 29, 2019)

Carbuncle said:


> I guess that's why you live on your knees while I stand and deliver, Sponge Bob:


And if commercial driving was a low skill job there wouldn't be tests like London's "the Knowledge," all these companies working on AV's wouldn't claim we need them because so many people suck at driving, and there wouldn't be such an astronomical turnover.

Skill for skill I guarantee I smoke you.

Oh, and this is my "low skill" father. He built and raced these:



UberBastid said:


> So, whats the answer? "From the mouths of babes", eh?
> 
> THAT'S a civil matter. Take it to civil court and get a judge to agree with you.
> But, don't sic the gov't on me.
> ...


There's no freedom at these paltry rates; literally the worst pay that's ever existed in this industry by far.


----------



## The_Solo (Feb 23, 2019)

A law like that is a fail anyways. Uber just starts putting promos of reducing what riders pay and when you drive 10 miles and make $2. It’s a poorly thought out solution. Once 75% is mandated Uber will get rid of minimum requirement and will just work around it and punish the drivers. It is a very slippery slope. 
And I fully agree with others who simply have said if you don’t like the situation you need to quit. It’s amazing because no matter what they do to the pay drivers keep driving. Uber/lyft pay what it takes to get people to drive and with these bad pay rates people keep driving so why should they pay more?


----------



## Carbuncle (Mar 29, 2019)

beebob said:


> I guess you're the guy that's Court Ordered to chauffeur Uber's clients.
> 
> When rates dropped, I learned a marketable skill and left uber for greener pastures.
> 
> ...


No they're not, you're undereducated.

For-hire driving is one of the highest risk, highest cost, unhealthy vocations and professions in the world:

https://www.osha.gov/Publications/taxi-driver-violence-factsheet.pdf


----------



## SLuz (Oct 20, 2016)

Except the US economic market did fail, as in the whole banking system went under and those market loving folks like JP Morgan Chase and Citibank & Goldman Sachs all of a sudden begged for Government intervention, with which the present economy is based on, so did you really make it on your own or did our government intervene (cough cough ) to save the freedom of the capitalist market with a socialism bailout, so you can live in an illusion that free markets work?


----------



## Carbuncle (Mar 29, 2019)

The_Solo said:


> A law like that is a fail anyways. Uber just starts putting promos of reducing what riders pay and when you drive 10 miles and make $2. It's a poorly thought out solution. Once 75% is mandated Uber will get rid of minimum requirement and will just work around it and punish the drivers. It is a very slippery slope.
> And I fully agree with others who simply have said if you don't like the situation you need to quit. It's amazing because no matter what they do to the pay drivers keep driving. Uber/lyft pay what it takes to get people to drive and with these bad pay rates people keep driving so why should they pay more?


Quitting doesn't protect the public from these immensely dishonest and irresponsible companies that are known to lie about pretty much everything.

None of you are arguing from a knowledge based perspective, only an ideological one that has been proven to be a disaster.


----------



## The_Solo (Feb 23, 2019)

Carbuncle said:


> Quitting doesn't protect the public from these immensely dishonest and irresponsible companies that are known to lie about pretty much everything.
> 
> None of you are arguing from a knowledge based perspective, only an ideological one that has been proven to be a disaster.


How so? Drivers whine over pay, drivers quit driving, prices much increase to get drivers to drive.
There is so many riders who need rides. Uber cares if all those riders are getting rides. They are getting those rides then the are priced correctly. If they truly paid so poorly they would have more riders than drivers.


----------



## Carbuncle (Mar 29, 2019)

The_Solo said:


> How so? Drivers whine over pay, drivers quit driving, prices much increase to get drivers to drive.
> There is so many riders who need rides. Uber cares if all those riders are getting rides. They are getting those rides then the are priced correctly. If they truly paid so poorly they would have more riders than drivers.


You're still not getting the point. It's a well established fact that underpaying drivers increases traffic fatalities and injuries exponentially.

Passengers' lives as well as the lives of everyone else on the road are in the hands of commercial drivers. The job is proven to be psychologically and physically taxing. Commercial drivers suffer severe health issues. They have to make enough to stay awake and healthy or others suffer.


----------



## No Prisoners (Mar 21, 2019)

Carbuncle said:


> You're still not getting the point. It's a well established fact that underpaying drivers increases traffic fatalities and injuries exponentially.
> 
> Passengers' lives as well as the lives of everyone else on the road are in the hands of commercial drivers. The job is proven to be psychologically and physically taxing. Commercial drivers suffer severe health issues. They have to make enough to stay awake and healthy or others suffer.


Haven't taken a single uber ride since Saturday. Maybe that's why sleeping so well lately. 
This afternoon I declined easily at least 20 consecrate pings. Turned off app, went to bathroom. Came back and app wouldn't let me sign on. Called Uber, asked rep if there was any problems. After the 2 minute hold she came back and suddenly app was working. She said no problems with my account. 
I asked if the baby threw a tantrum and put me on timeout for not accepting pings. She said Uber doesn't penalize drive for low acceptance. I said thanks, then I'll continue declining. No further problems since.


----------



## SurgeMasterMN (Sep 10, 2016)

Carbuncle said:


> You're still not getting the point. It's a well established fact that underpaying drivers increases traffic fatalities and injuries exponentially.
> 
> Passengers' lives as well as the lives of everyone else on the road are in the hands of commercial drivers. The job is proven to be psychologically and physically taxing. Commercial drivers suffer severe health issues. They have to make enough to stay awake and healthy or others suffer.


And History repeats 110 years later

1930's

During the Great Depression, New York had as many as 30,000 cab drivers. With more drivers than passengers, cab drivers were working longer hours which led to growing public concern over the maintenance and mechanical integrity of taxi vehicles. To resolve these issues, the city considered creating a taxi monopoly, but the plan was abandoned after New York City Mayor Jimmy Walker was accused of accepting a bribe from the Parmelee Company, the largest taxi company.

In 1937, Mayor Fiorello H. La Guardia signed the Haas Act which introduced official taxi licenses and the medallion system that remains in place today. The law limited the total number of cab licenses to 16,900, but the number dwindled to 11,787 licenses, staying equal over the next six decades.[2]


----------



## Carbuncle (Mar 29, 2019)

SurgeMasterMN said:


> And History repeats 110 years later
> 
> 1930's
> 
> ...


Medallions are no longer necessary. Obviously, places like NYC and SF need to cap the number of drivers, but this tech makes it much easier to raise that number significantly and simply put drivers in a digital queue so demand can still be reasonably satisfied.



No Prisoners said:


> Haven't taken a single uber ride since Saturday. Maybe that's why sleeping so well lately.
> This afternoon I declined easily at least 20 consecrate pings. Turned off app, went to bathroom. Came back and app wouldn't let me sign on. Called Uber, asked rep if there was any problems. After the 2 minute hold she came back and suddenly app was working. She said no problems with my account.
> I asked if the baby threw a tantrum and put me on timeout for not accepting pings. She said Uber doesn't penalize drive for low acceptance. I said thanks, then I'll continue declining. No further problems since.


When a half asleep, coked up Uber driver who's been binge driving for 72 hours to make rent runs a light and t-bones someone you care about get back to me.


----------



## SurgeMasterMN (Sep 10, 2016)

Want to know some more crazy history of Taxis in NYC? We had Electric Car Taxis 130 years ago....

*Late 1890's*

The first taxicab company in New York City was the Samuel's Electric Carriage and Wagon Company (E.C.W.C.), which began running 12 electric hansom cabs in July 1897.[38] The company ran until 1898 with up to 62 cabs operating until it was reformed by its financiers to form the Electric Vehicle Company.[39] The company then built the Electrobat electric car, and had up to 100 taxicabs running in total by 1899.

1899 also saw a number of notable firsts for the Electric Vehicle Company. On May 20, 1899, Jacob German, driving an electric taxicab received the first speeding ticket in the United States.[40][41] Later that year, on September 13, Henry Bliss became the first victim of an automotive accident in the United States when he was hit by an electric taxicab as he was helping a friend from a streetcar.[34]

By the early 1900s the Electric Vehicle company was running up to 1,000 electric taxicabs on the streets of New York City until, in January 1907, a fire destroyed 300 of these vehicles which, in conjunction with the Panic of 1907 caused the company to collapse.



Carbuncle said:


> Medallions are no longer necessary. Obviously, places like NYC and SF need to cap the number of drivers, but this tech makes it much easier to raise that number significantly and simply put drivers in a digital queue so demand can still be reasonably satisfied.
> 
> 
> When a half asleep, coked up Uber driver who's been binge driving for 72 hours to make rent runs a light and t-bones someone you care about get back to me.


----------



## The Entomologist (Sep 23, 2018)

SurgeMasterMN said:


> Anyone else with ideas


The day someone hacks their driver database and grabs all the drivers phone numbers currently active is the day uber will sink because that following month a massive union will be formed, nation wide strikes.

They better triple paddle that lock and pray someone doesn't discover an exploit to get into their system as it was done a few years back.

That is the only way I can see their downfall because legally, they could care less if they end up paying lawsuits for the rest of the company's existence.

Doesn't change you can **** them every day by over collecting cancel fees, long hauling and making their clients private.


----------



## No Prisoners (Mar 21, 2019)

The Entomologist said:


> The day someone hacks their driver database and grabs all the drivers phone numbers currently active is the day uber will sink because that following month a massive union will be formed, nation wide strikes.
> 
> They better triple paddle that lock and pray someone doesn't discover an exploit to get into their system as it was done a few years back.
> 
> ...


Too bad Assange was arrested. Was hoping Wikileaks would take care of it. Maybe there's a Russian disgruntled driver somewhere. 
Hey let's figure another Russian collusion.


----------



## The Entomologist (Sep 23, 2018)

No Prisoners said:


> Too bad Assange was arrested. Was hoping Wikileaks would take care of it. Maybe there's a Russian disgruntled driver somewhere.
> Hey let's figure another Russian collusion.


All it takes is the right set up posted in the darknet and a nice fat bounty contributed by each driver giving a mere dollar, you'll see every hacker in the world trying to break in.


----------



## SurgeMasterMN (Sep 10, 2016)

The Entomologist said:


> The day someone hacks their driver database and grabs all the drivers phone numbers currently active is the day uber will sink because that following month a massive union will be formed, nation wide strikes.
> 
> They better triple paddle that lock and pray someone doesn't discover an exploit to get into their system as it was done a few years back.
> 
> ...


----------



## Toocutetofail (Sep 14, 2018)

beebob said:


> I guess you're the guy that's Court Ordered to chauffeur Uber's clients.
> 
> When rates dropped, I learned a marketable skill and left uber for greener pastures.
> 
> ...












Is this site owned by Uber????


----------



## tohunt4me (Nov 23, 2015)

SurgeMasterMN said:


> https://bentcorner.com/law-uber-lyft-drivers-75-percent/





SurgeMasterMN said:


> https://bentcorner.com/law-uber-lyft-drivers-75-percent/





beebob said:


> Agreed ?? The purpose of government is to safeguard rights, not regulate business. ?Capitalism works precisely because it allows markets to fail. ?Congress fails precisely because it attempts to regulate markets. ... ?The purpose of government is to safeguard rights, not regulate business?





beebob said:


> Agreed ?? The purpose of government is to safeguard rights, not regulate business. ?Capitalism works precisely because it allows markets to fail. ?Congress fails precisely because it attempts to regulate markets. ... ?The purpose of government is to safeguard rights, not regulate business?





beebob said:


> Agreed ?? The purpose of government is to safeguard rights, not regulate business. ?Capitalism works precisely because it allows markets to fail. ?Congress fails precisely because it attempts to regulate markets. ... ?The purpose of government is to safeguard rights, not regulate business?





beebob said:


> Agreed ?? The purpose of government is to safeguard rights, not regulate business. ?Capitalism works precisely because it allows markets to fail. ?Congress fails precisely because it attempts to regulate markets. ... ?The purpose of government is to safeguard rights, not regulate business?





beebob said:


> Agreed ?? The purpose of government is to safeguard rights, not regulate business. ?Capitalism works precisely because it allows markets to fail. ?Congress fails precisely because it attempts to regulate markets. ... ?The purpose of government is to safeguard rights, not regulate business?





beebob said:


> Agreed ?? The purpose of government is to safeguard rights, not regulate business. ?Capitalism works precisely because it allows markets to fail. ?Congress fails precisely because it attempts to regulate markets. ... ?The purpose of government is to safeguard rights, not regulate business?





beebob said:


> Agreed ?? The purpose of government is to safeguard rights, not regulate business. ?Capitalism works precisely because it allows markets to fail. ?Congress fails precisely because it attempts to regulate markets. ... ?The purpose of government is to safeguard rights, not regulate business?





beebob said:


> Agreed ?? The purpose of government is to safeguard rights, not regulate business. ?Capitalism works precisely because it allows markets to fail. ?Congress fails precisely because it attempts to regulate markets. ... ?The purpose of government is to safeguard rights, not regulate business?





SurgeMasterMN said:


> https://bentcorner.com/law-uber-lyft-drivers-75-percent/





SurgeMasterMN said:


> https://bentcorner.com/law-uber-lyft-drivers-75-percent/





Carbuncle said:


> I guess that's why you live on your knees while I stand and deliver, Sponge Bob:


I signed up for 80%/20% !

Why Accept Less !


----------



## No Prisoners (Mar 21, 2019)

100% is the only acceptable solution.


----------



## uberdriverfornow (Jan 10, 2016)

UberBastid said:


> I always vote for freedom.
> Freedom of Uber to charge pax's what the market bears.
> Freedom of Uber to pay drivers what the market bears.
> 
> ...


Freedom for Uber to treat its drivers like employees but pay them like independent contractors ?

Almost every governmental and judicial entity is in agreement that thats been going on since their inception.

I dont think anyone hss ever agreed with anything youve ever said.


----------



## beebob (Apr 9, 2019)

Carbuncle said:


> And if commercial driving was a low skill job there wouldn't be tests like London's "the Knowledge," all these companies working on AV's wouldn't claim we need them because so many people suck at driving, and there wouldn't be such an astronomical turnover.
> 
> Skill for skill I guarantee I smoke you.
> 
> ...


Boo Whoo
find another job
or are u unemployable?
in that case, u should thx ur maker that uber exists

how's this crybaby doing?











tohunt4me said:


> I signed up for 80%/20% !
> 
> Why Accept Less !


_"Why Accept Less !"_
No reason, delete the driver's app and move on.
or do u have Nothing to move on to?

*Real World since the beginning of time:* The Working, menial labor, low skill Poor have very Limited Options.
Whose fault is that? Uber? The Government? The meanie passengers?

Try: Yourself
and now u complain.

Well....... I guess that's one of your limited options


----------



## RogueErik (Feb 20, 2018)

UberBastid said:


> I always vote for freedom.
> Freedom of Uber to charge pax's what the market bears.
> Freedom of Uber to pay drivers what the market bears.
> 
> ...


I hope hedge fund managers don't tank your retirement/pension because the FREEDOM you gave them to manage it makes you responsible.

If you have ANY financial holdings other than in commodities your logic is flawed.

There needs to be a MINIMUM protection for consumers AND workers... or you get ancient Egypt or 1820's USA...

and I'm a staunch Ayn Rand fan...

You have the FREEDOM to buy bad meat...
You have the FREEDOM to buy a new car that was a lemon...
You have the FREEDOM to marry someone who abuses you...
so it's your fault

No, we as a country, decided long ago that people need protection from what they may not understand is against their best interest...


----------



## Taksomotor (Mar 19, 2019)

Everybody wants the benefits of socialism until they find out that it costs a lot and it's results are shit. But people will keep falling for the free cheese in a trap...


----------



## RogueErik (Feb 20, 2018)

beebob said:


> Agreed ?
> 
> ? The purpose of government is to safeguard rights,
> not regulate business.
> ...


Right...

2008 bank bail out saved the economy, "capitalism" didn't allow markets to fail...

Minimum wage, government mandate to ensure a living wage, saved the economy...

1929 businesses took out full page ads telling people to invest in stock because it was safe (first pump and dump), then the Great Depression and BUSINESSES were no longer allowed to engage in that practice.

The social security that someone in your family receives... 1/2 was paid by the employer... tell them to send the cash back to the owner of the company they worked for because the government shouldn't have received it in the first place on their behalf

Corporations where originally constructed as a temporary entity that would shield private/public partnerships (I.e. building dams or bridges) from personal liability should they fail... NOT A BUSINESS

Your argument fails at:
The CEO doesn't own the business and is not PERSONALLY responsible for the actions of the Corporation... DUE TO GOVERNMENT REGULATION


----------



## Taksomotor (Mar 19, 2019)

beebob said:


> how's this crybaby doing?


Uber driver my butt.


----------



## RogueErik (Feb 20, 2018)

Taksomotor said:


> Everybody wants the benefits of socialism until they find out that it costs a lot and it's results are shit. But people will keep falling for the free cheese in a trap...


Yeah you are soooo right. We don't need schools, Medicaid, social security, firefighters, paved roads, bridges or police... AM I RIGHT or AM I RIGHT!!!


----------



## Carbuncle (Mar 29, 2019)

beebob said:


> Boo Whoo
> find another job
> or are u unemployable?
> in that case, u should thx ur maker that uber exists
> ...


Limited options?

Kid, guaranteed I possess far more skill in multiple disciplines than you do.

Guaranteed.

And I'll be happy to prove it any time.

And, despite your ignorant insistence, commercial driving is not a low skill job. If it was the AV's would have been flooding the streets by now.

I'd call you "challenged." But that would be an insult to challenged people.



Taksomotor said:


> Everybody wants the benefits of socialism until they find out that it costs a lot and it's results are shit. But people will keep falling for the free cheese in a trap...


Every nation that blends socialism with capitalism (Australia, New Zealand, nearly all of Europe, Costa Rica) is a better place to live on average for citizens than the US. By far.

The US is only great for people with lots of money. That's the same barometer we see in third world ?holes and dictatorships.



RogueErik said:


> I hope hedge fund managers don't tank your retirement/pension because the FREEDOM you gave them to manage it makes you responsible.
> 
> If you have ANY financial holdings other than in commodities your logic is flawed.
> 
> ...


You don't sound like a staunch Rand fan.

I enjoy her heroic fictions but her economics are absurd 90% of the time.


----------



## SurgeMasterMN (Sep 10, 2016)

Dang I created a monster with this post. Was just attempting to put forth a video about some drivers in Connecticut trying to get back to their original 75% take like most of us had in the beginning.

I am not a huge fan of government intervention so I hear drivers wanting the Free Market to work. That is how it is playing out now so maybe we should just see how low Uber / Lyft will go with cuts. This would shake out the dead weight and make every driver reevaluate their strategy or get out. This may eventually force both companies to restructure their pay to drivers without government intervention but this will be a ways out.

I can see Lyft coming out and saying drivers we have heard you and we are raising rates to improve the quality of life for our drivers and insure our customers (riders) are getting in a well maintained vehicle with an enthusiastic driver. Since Uber has publicly stated it is going to get worse for drivers this is the time Lyft can say we are raising our rates and making it an effort to make it better for drivers. If Lyft plays this right they can dominate the industry by 2020. Uber has already crapped the bed it is hard for them to wipe it off now.

On the flipside it is interesting to see some drivers would be willing to let their income keep getting reduced and be fighting tooth and nail against any driver that says we would like 75% of the total fare. Help me understand this motive. Why would any driver fight against this? Unless they really do not drive at all.


----------



## Carbuncle (Mar 29, 2019)

JimD said:


> i could not agree more with uberbastid...... and i could not possibly agree one iota less with carbuncle......
> still a free country....... :smiles


The US is not now nor has it ever been a free country. Nor has it ever been truly capitalist.

A capitalist (and free) system allows for contractual negotiations between all involved parties. The vast majority of all employment contracts in the US are contracts of adhesion and "take it or leave it." Neither are negotiable. The US also has 26 "right to work" states. The language is grossly misleading and the legislation actually reduces worker freedoms while also hobbling collective bargaining rights, which are essential to negotiating terms.

The US is a predominantly service economy and service jobs are notoriously low paying and freedom reducing.

It's obvious you're not at all familiar with any of the people who created capitalist thought. Nor do you seem to be familiar with the thinking and works of the Founders of the US.

You've got a lot of homework to do.



SurgeMasterMN said:


> Dang I created a monster with this post. Was just attempting to put forth a video about some drivers in Connecticut trying to get back to their original 75% take like most of us had in the beginning.
> 
> I am not a huge fan of government intervention so I hear drivers wanting the Free Market to work. That is how it is playing out now so maybe we should just see how low Uber / Lyft will go with cuts. This would shake out the dead weight and make every driver reevaluate their strategy or get out. This may eventually force both companies to restructure their pay to drivers without government intervention but this will be a ways out.
> 
> ...


It's not a free market if negotiations are denied to any involved party.

Read the driver contract. It's literally the exact opposite of an independent contractor agreement.


----------



## Carbuncle (Mar 29, 2019)

SurgeMasterMN said:


> Dang I created a monster with this post. Was just attempting to put forth a video about some drivers in Connecticut trying to get back to their original 75% take like most of us had in the beginning.
> 
> I am not a huge fan of government intervention so I hear drivers wanting the Free Market to work. That is how it is playing out now so maybe we should just see how low Uber / Lyft will go with cuts. This would shake out the dead weight and make every driver reevaluate their strategy or get out. This may eventually force both companies to restructure their pay to drivers without government intervention but this will be a ways out.
> 
> ...


Sorry, but history has proven every single time that this is purely delusional thinking:

"I am not a huge fan of government intervention so I hear drivers wanting the Free Market to work. That is how it is playing out now so maybe we should just see how low Uber / Lyft will go with cuts. This would shake out the dead weight and make every driver reevaluate their strategy or get out. This may eventually force both companies to restructure their pay to drivers without government intervention but this will be a ways out."

It is abundantly clear that virtually no one in tech operates with the same sensibilities towards workers as Henry Ford did.

Any industry that serves a utilitarian function but gets taken over by private enterprise, in a system where only shareholders' interests dictate policy, MUST be regulated or everything deteriorates and a lot of people die.

Utilities and transportation must be regulated because they pose significant public safety risks and are destabilizing to the nation when they run unfettered.

There is no example in history in which "the market decided" and things went well. Not. One.

I'll leave you with this:

"The [Fascist] government will accord full freedom to private enterprise and will abandon all intervention in private economy."
-Benito Mussolini

Contrast that with this:

"I hope we shall crush in its birth the aristocracy of our monied corporations which dare already to challenge our government to a trial by strength, and bid defiance to the laws of our country."
-Thomas Jefferson


----------



## Bob Reynolds (Dec 20, 2014)

If Uber was actually doing the right thing and doing what they had promised in the first place, then this bill would not have been necessary. But since Uber gamed the system, Uber will now have this bill (and others like it) to deal with.


----------



## Buckiemohawk (Jun 23, 2015)

This is a great law for Uber. So they cant keep changing payouts and what they take. I dont know why anyone would oppose this if their not with Uber or Lyft


----------



## SurgeMasterMN (Sep 10, 2016)

Carbuncle said:


> Sorry, but history has proven every single time that this is purely delusional thinking:
> 
> "I am not a huge fan of government intervention so I hear drivers wanting the Free Market to work. That is how it is playing out now so maybe we should just see how low Uber / Lyft will go with cuts. This would shake out the dead weight and make every driver reevaluate their strategy or get out. This may eventually force both companies to restructure their pay to drivers without government intervention but this will be a ways out."
> 
> ...


I respect your views ?


----------



## Carbuncle (Mar 29, 2019)

SurgeMasterMN said:


> I respect your views ?


I appreciate that but these aren't my views, they're facts that have been consistently proven by historical and contemporary precedent.

If the facts stated otherwise I would have said as much.

Adam Smith, the universally agreed upon godfather of capitalist ideology, discussed power imbalances in his writings. He was also an acute moral philosopher with a deep concern for the rights of the laboring class to be able to negotiate the terms of their employment. Both he and Marx agreed workers deserved protections and autonomy over their labor, they merely diverged in some areas about how to go about ensuring this.

Until all working Americans have protected negotiating power the US will fail to be a capitalist and free economy and nation.


----------



## No Prisoners (Mar 21, 2019)

Main reason for rushing to IPO and cash out investors. Remember the house is controlled by Dems now. This is not a matter of if but when.
https://theintercept.com/2019/04/01/lyft-ipo-gig-economy-labor-law/


----------



## Carbuncle (Mar 29, 2019)

beebob said:


> Boo Whoo
> find another job
> or are u unemployable?
> in that case, u should thx ur maker that uber exists
> ...


Let's see your proof that commercial driving is a low skill job.

All of these studies and articles call BS on your claims:

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC18253/
https://www.thersa.org/discover/publications-and-articles/reports/smarter-cab-drivers
https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/london-taxi-memory/
https://amp.theatlantic.com/amp/article/502289/
https://tcf.org/content/commentary/uber-fares-to-deliver-fair-pay/
You've. Got. NOTHING.


----------



## UberBastid (Oct 1, 2016)

RogueErik said:


> I hope hedge fund managers don't tank your retirement/pension because the FREEDOM you gave them to manage it makes you responsible.
> 
> If you have ANY financial holdings other than in commodities your logic is flawed.
> 
> ...


Why are you guys taking whatever I say to the EXTREME.
The framers of our Declaration of Independence and Constitution did not demand freedom to do harm to our fellow citizens, and neither do I. There needs to be minimum protection for consumers and workers. There needs to be limits to freedom.

I am saying that if I want to buy bad meat - I should have the freedom to do so.
If I want to buy a car that's a lemon - I should have the freedom to do so.
I should have the freedom to marry anyone I want - nice, mean, pretty, ugly, male, female ... my choice, not the governments. Freedom.

Just because I have the freedom to marry someone who abuses me - doesn't give someone the right to abuse me. Your freedom to throw a punch _ends _at my nose, even if we married.

I think that you are confusing freedom with anarchy. Again, going to the extreme.
I am not preaching anarchy. Or pure capitalism.
I tend to lean towards freedom from government intervention in my life.

Benjamin Franklin once said: "Those who would give up Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety." I agree with him. I can manage my own life, I don't need nanny to watch out for me. I will take the risk of the exercise of my liberty, and I'll take my bumps for it without crying ... much.

If you don't want that responsibility move to a place that manages your life for you. Try Venezuela, or Cuba ... free health care too.



Carbuncle said:


> US will fail to be a capitalist and free economy and nation.


Fail to be a nation? Are you kidding?
The US is the GREATEST nation this planet has ever seen. Ever.
We have done more to advance humanity than ANY OTHER organization or government.
Can you imagine what this planet would be like _right now_, it it wasn't for us?


----------



## The-one-with-tundra (May 19, 2017)

UberBastid said:


> We agree on the fee for service


-o:


----------



## Carbuncle (Mar 29, 2019)

UberBastid said:


> If you don't want that responsibility move to a place that manages your life for you. Try Venezuela, or Cuba ... free health care too.
> 
> 
> Fail to be a nation? Are you kidding?
> ...


Learn to read, dude.

And you're objectively wrong. The US is not the best nation ever. Wealth and power alone do not determine greatness. How a nation treats its citizens is the primary metric for determining greatness and freedom. There have been and are now many other countries in which the citizens lived better lives overall.

And your Cuba and Venezuela analogies are non sequiturs.

I'll see your Cuba and Venezuela and raise you Norway, Sweden, Switzerland, Portugal, Australia, New Zealand, Germany, Iceland, Denmark, Costa Rica, Ireland, Bali, Finland, the UK, Austria, Canada, and more. All of these nations have overall better quality of living standards than the US.

The US has the worst homeless problem in the world (both India and Pakistan treat their homeless better and all Muslim nations do as well), the worst poverty/crime/violence/police brutality and corruption/access to affordable care/access to affordable higher education/worst wage and worker protections/malnutrition/infant, child, and maternal mortality rates/corporate corruption and many other crucial metrics of all (or nearly all) developed and many developing nations. The US also treats its veterans worse than all developed nations do.


----------



## The Texan (Mar 1, 2019)

Look, I'm an U/L driver too, (for now anyways).

How in the HELL are you going to Tell a non govt. company what it can and can't charge, who gets what, etc.

I'm sorry, but the Libertarian in me says this is BS. Do I want 75% of the fare? Hell Yes!!
Should a state/fed Govt. mandate it into law? HELL NO!

What are ya'll thinking?


----------



## Carbuncle (Mar 29, 2019)

The Texan said:


> Look, I'm an U/L driver too, (for now anyways).
> 
> How in the HELL are you going to Tell a non govt. company what it can and can't charge, who gets what, etc.
> 
> ...


You're forgetting something very crucial here. In a representative system YOU are part of the government. It's incumbent on you and every citizen to elect reps and engage government in a way that maximizes the greater good.

Without government regulating wage and worker protections you instantly become a horror show of a nation.

Here are the countries that have no or nearly no wage and worker protections and no unions and collective bargaining: North Korea, Brunei, Somalia, Qatar, the UAE, Guinea, Guyana, Malaysia, East Timor.

Nations that have marginal protections include most of Africa's, Asia's, Russia and Eastern Bloc Nations, Afghanistan, India... You get the picture.

And the US has been rapidly following the worst examples. 26 states are "right to work" and in nearly all of them prevailing wages are terrible, ESPECIALLY if you're tipped employee.

Look at Germany. They used to have very strong trade unions with 40% of the working population belonging to one. Then membership plunged by half and the government saw a rapid decline in earnings so they had to intervene to stop the wage theft and implement a minimum wage for the first time in the nation's history.

You're arguing entirely from ideology, not from precedent or fact. This is a huge problem in the US where citizens imagine fluffy scenarios and ideas irrespective of reality.


----------



## dryverjohn (Jun 3, 2018)

TROLL ALERT, anything that seems to favor an Uber F job on the driver should be treated as a comment from an Uber Employee or Uber PR firm, don't debate with Trolls. Back to the show.


----------



## Cary Grant (Jul 14, 2015)

The Law of Unintended Consequences will cure what ails the statists and statheists that seek to deploy the threat of violence via a government gun to obtain loot, which is exactly what happens due to any and all law that attempts to circumvent market regulation with statist regulation.

In nature, parasites that destroy what they suck blood from die off. In the human economy, parasites that use government force to steal what they do not own and have not earned end up poorer as a result, and tend to literally die off faster than the other half of the population that embrace our natural freedoms protected by our limited government. This is not fantasy, myth, or urban legend. Poor people don't live long.

I'm not talking about broke people, or low income people. Broke is a temporary situation. Low income can change by a worker endeavoring to improve their economic value, by learning more skills, mastering more skills, working hard, and working smart.

Poor in America is a lifestyle choice. And those people do not live to collect much, if any, Social Security. These are the parasites that will kill the economy they suck blood from, if they were not self-limiting by their poor lifestyle choices.

In nature, a high lethality virus is self-limiting because of the nature of imperfect cellular replication. Otherwise, either all viruses would no longer exist, OR none of us would be alive. What kills us over time -- aging -- also makes life risky, like one of the several high lethality hemorrhagic *fever*s.

The same phenomena can be observed in human politics. Statist enforced collectivism has a perfect 100% failure rate, compounded with the largest genocides in human history (over 100,000,000 dead at the hands of their own government in the last century). Voluntary collectivist systems also have a 100% failure rate, without the genocide so common among the failed statist experiments, although some of these voluntary groups have starved to death. There are literally no old statist collectivist systems with a long history. ALL exceptions are not purely collectivist, and have survived SOLEY because of economic input from other largely free markets, free enterprise systems, and market-regulated economies.

Talent and capital flow to where it is best rewarded, and remains where it is well treated. This is true at every socioeconomic level, in every human endeavor. No exception changes this rule, because no exception survives.

Minimum wage laws have increased unemployment, especially of low and no skill workers. In America, it's an extremely racist law when measured by results.

Statist tyranny used by a mobocracy to dictate prices had so many unintended consequences that it's impossible to list them all, but here are a few:

• Lower wages (profits)
• Higher costs of operation
• Higher costs to passengers
• Longer wait times 
• Increased inefficiencies 
• Increased driver dissatisfaction
• Increasingly poor passenger experiences
• Increasing contract violations
• Increased grifting

Imagine a state where the corruptocrats and kleptocrats forced your employer to pay you more than you're worth. The bottom half of the franchise will claim victory while at the same time proving Drs. Dunning and Kruger to be spot on correct about the bottom half's cognitive capacity.

Now imagine your employer cutting your hours and/or decreasing the demand for your efforts so that your net-net take home is now less than before the corruptocrats and kleptocrats meddled on your behalf. While you claimed victory, in reality you still lose.

We've seen the greatest reduction of human poverty around the globe in the last half-century, and this reduction is directly correlated to a decrease in statist enforced collectivism and egalitarianism (what the non-thinking call socialism, or communism, or fascism, in ANY of it's derivative forms -- they are ALL statist in nature).

If you don't like what you're earning, vote with your feet. Go find another job. There's no shortage of work in America (on any given day there are about 7,000,000+ new job openings). If you have no skills, GET SOME. Life doesn't owe you a thing, and neither does your fellow countrymen. Those that seek to obtain loot using the gooberment only get the bare minimum, which is always less than their worth. If you want more, then you still have to earn it, and that means abandoning your addiction to the hind teat of the nanny state.


----------



## Carbuncle (Mar 29, 2019)

Cary Grant said:


> The Law of Unintended Consequences will cure what ails the statists and statheists that seek to deploy the threat of violence via a government gun to obtain loot, which is exactly what happens due to any and all law that attempts to circumvent market regulation with statist regulation.
> 
> In nature, parasites that destroy what they suck blood from die off. In the human economy, parasites that use government force to steal what they do not own and have not earned end up poorer as a result, and tend to literally die off faster than the other half of the population that embrace our natural freedoms protected by our limited government. This is not fantasy, myth, or urban legend. Poor people don't live long.
> 
> ...


That was a whole lot of nothing.

Let's take a look at just one of your claims regarding wage protections, whether via MW floors or collective bargaining/unions (which Adam Smith also advocated for):

The only nations with no or nearly no wage protections are North Korea, Somalia, Brunei, Guinea, Guayana, East Timor, Qatar, the UAE, Malaysia. The nations with marginal and/or largely unenforced protections are nearly all of Africa's, Latin America's, most of Asia's, most former Eastern Bloc and former Soviet Nations/Russia... you get the picture.

Germany recently had to implement a MW for the first time in their history in response to rampant wage theft and earnings reductions as trade unions went from 40% membership to 20%.

There is not one example that has ever existed in which eliminating wage protections benefitted employees across any sector.

In the US union membership hit its peak under Ike at 32%. Now it's around 10% and, not surprisingly, employees have seen earnings stagnate or go backwards relative to inflation.

Public unis in the US were tuition free up until the early 70's. This is one of the biggest reasons the US saw so much economic growth.

Seriously, man, your entire screed was essentially a what's what of logical fallacies.

I recommend avoiding open flames, Straw Man.


----------



## SLuz (Oct 20, 2016)

Cary Grant said:


> Poor in America is a lifestyle choice. And those people do not live to collect much, if any, Social Security. These are the parasites that will kill the economy they suck blood from, if they were not self-limiting by their poor lifestyle choices.


  
What's that saying "misses the forest for the trees" .
https://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-11-696
It is noteworthy that when the Government Accountability Office (GAO) released its report in 2011 on the secret $16 _trillion_ of lending by the Fed to shore up the Wall Street banks, the GAO had this to say about the Fed's unprecedented (and to this day still unexplained) lending to the London-based broker-dealer affiliates of the Wall Street banks:

"In September and November of 2008, the Federal Reserve Board invoked section 13(3) [emergency lending] of the Federal Reserve Act to authorize FRBNY [Federal Reserve Bank of New York] to extend credit to the London-based broker-dealer subsidiaries of Merrill Lynch, Goldman Sachs, Morgan Stanley, and Citigroup, as well as the U.S. broker-dealer subsidiaries of Merrill Lynch, Goldman Sachs, and Morgan Stanley&#8230;But the Emergency Economic Stabilization Act of 2008 reports, other public disclosures and submitted documents we reviewed did not provide complete explanations of how these exceptional credit extensions satisfied section 13(3) criteria&#8230;the Federal Reserve Board could not provide documentation explaining why these extensions were provided specifically to affiliates of these four primary dealers."


----------



## Carbuncle (Mar 29, 2019)

Cary Grant said:


> The Law of Unintended Consequences will cure what ails the statists and statheists that seek to deploy the threat of violence via a government gun to obtain loot, which is exactly what happens due to any and all law that attempts to circumvent market regulation with statist regulation.
> 
> In nature, parasites that destroy what they suck blood from die off. In the human economy, parasites that use government force to steal what they do not own and have not earned end up poorer as a result, and tend to literally die off faster than the other half of the population that embrace our natural freedoms protected by our limited government. This is not fantasy, myth, or urban legend. Poor people don't live long.
> 
> ...


Literally every one of these bullet points is now orders of magnitude worse under Uber and Lyft in every market outside NYC, the only place where U/L are regulated to a measurable degree in the US:

"• Lower wages (profits)
• Higher costs of operation
• Higher costs to passengers
• Longer wait times 
• Increased inefficiencies 
• Increased driver dissatisfaction
• Increasingly poor passenger experiences
• Increasing contract violations
• Increased grifting"

AND U/L have added numerous other egregious issues, several of which have resulted in thousands of deaths and tens of thousands of other various violent crimes.



Cary Grant said:


> The Law of Unintended Consequences will cure what ails the statists and statheists that seek to deploy the threat of violence via a government gun to obtain loot, which is exactly what happens due to any and all law that attempts to circumvent market regulation with statist regulation.
> 
> In nature, parasites that destroy what they suck blood from die off. In the human economy, parasites that use government force to steal what they do not own and have not earned end up poorer as a result, and tend to literally die off faster than the other half of the population that embrace our natural freedoms protected by our limited government. This is not fantasy, myth, or urban legend. Poor people don't live long.
> 
> ...


Laugh all you want. You have no factual data to support your rant.

And merely dismissing an argument is an admission of defeat.

All you have is hyperbole.


----------



## soontobeautomated (Apr 4, 2017)

I love hearing US citizens go on and celebrate their "freedoms", like its the only "free" country on earth. Kind of makes me laugh.

But what is particularly concerning when I have travelled extensively throughout the US, is that I find that those that celebrate their freedoms the most, have never actually travelled outside of the US, although they are overwhelmingly free to do so. Perhaps employers providing one, perhaps two weeks annual leave helps to keep the nation within the USA, with their blinkers on celebrating their "freedoms" domestically, when they have no idea how the rest of the world _actually _operates.

Of course, many of the US native one-percenters travel extensively internationally. I bet they are very happy with the current arrangements that the working poor will rarely, if ever, leave the US to see first hand how "free" other successful countries are.


----------



## possibledriver (Dec 16, 2014)

beebob said:


> Agreed ?
> 
> ? The purpose of government is to safeguard rights,
> not regulate business.
> ...


The purpose of the government is what the Preamble says " form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare ". Until we're protected from business screwing all of us over, have universal healthcare and universal education we've not even finished what the preamble calls for much established civil rights for every person in the country we have no rights.


----------



## Carbuncle (Mar 29, 2019)

possibledriver said:


> The purpose of the government is what the Preamble says " form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare ". Until we're protected from business screwing all of us over, have universal healthcare and universal education we've not even finished what the preamble calls for much established civil rights for every person in the country we have no rights.





possibledriver said:


> The purpose of the government is what the Preamble says " form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare ". Until we're protected from business screwing all of us over, have universal healthcare and universal education we've not even finished what the preamble calls for much established civil rights for every person in the country we have no rights.





soontobeautomated said:


> I love hearing US citizens go on and celebrate their "freedoms", like its the only "free" country on earth. Kind of makes me laugh.
> 
> But what is particularly concerning when I have travelled extensively throughout the US, is that I find that those that celebrate their freedoms the most, have never actually travelled outside of the US, although they are overwhelmingly free to do so. Perhaps employers providing one, perhaps two weeks annual leave helps to keep the nation within the USA, with their blinkers on celebrating their "freedoms" domestically, when they have no idea how the rest of the world _actually _operates.
> 
> Of course, many of the US native one-percenters travel extensively internationally. I bet they are very happy with the current arrangements that the working poor will rarely, if ever, leave the US to see first hand how "free" other successful countries are.


EXACTLY.

Consider these statements:

"I hope we shall crush in its birth the aristocracy of our monied corporations which dare already to challenge our government to a trial by strength, and bid defiance to the laws of our country."
-Thomas Jefferson

"The [Fascist] government will accord full freedom to private enterprise and will abandon all intervention in private economy."
-Benito Mussolini


----------



## smarternotharder (Apr 17, 2019)

soontobeautomated said:


> I love hearing US citizens go on and celebrate their "freedoms", like its the only "free" country on earth. Kind of makes me laugh.
> 
> But what is particularly concerning when I have travelled extensively throughout the US, is that I find that those that celebrate their freedoms the most, have never actually travelled outside of the US, although they are overwhelmingly free to do so. Perhaps employers providing one, perhaps two weeks annual leave helps to keep the nation within the USA, with their blinkers on celebrating their "freedoms" domestically, when they have no idea how the rest of the world _actually _operates.
> 
> Of course, many of the US native one-percenters travel extensively internationally. I bet they are very happy with the current arrangements that the working poor will rarely, if ever, leave the US to see first hand how "free" other successful countries are.


cant leave now it requires them cloneing your phone & notebook hard drive without your consent, sticking a finger up your butt, iris, facial recognition, gait scan to save in a database & everywhere you go people hate you

pretty much trapped unless you leaving for good but its big & 11 states have legal weed so least they not checking papers at every states borders although they are tracking your cell phone so cant have 1 in your real name & their tracking everywhere your license plate goes so gotta use products for that

land of the free


----------



## possibledriver (Dec 16, 2014)

Free to have all our data sliced and diced then used without recompense.



Cary Grant said:


> The Law of Unintended Consequences will cure what ails the statists and statheists that seek to deploy the threat of violence via a government gun to obtain loot, which is exactly what happens due to any and all law that attempts to circumvent market regulation with statist regulation.
> 
> In nature, parasites that destroy what they suck blood from die off. In the human economy, parasites that use government force to steal what they do not own and have not earned end up poorer as a result, and tend to literally die off faster than the other half of the population that embrace our natural freedoms protected by our limited government. This is not fantasy, myth, or urban legend. Poor people don't live long.
> 
> ...


Parasites. You mean those who suck the blood out of the working class while steadily decreasing pay and benefits and those who invest a few dollars and reap huge profits by demanding the companies do their bidding and strangle labor. You mean those who hold ownership in companies that pay so little that they have to train employees how to sign up for government benefits. Those same one who cost actually COST states because employees get more medicaid and food stamps than the company pays in taxes? In that case we agree on the definition of parasites.


----------



## Cary Grant (Jul 14, 2015)

Carbuncle said:


> Laugh all you want. You have no factual data to support your rant.
> 
> And merely dismissing an argument is an admission of defeat.
> 
> All you have is hyperbole.


You're projecting. Nice try. You earned an F minus. Good luck, serf.


----------



## VictorD (Apr 30, 2017)

UberBastid said:


> I always vote for freedom.
> Freedom of Uber to charge pax's what the market bears.
> Freedom of Uber to pay drivers what the market bears.
> 
> ...


This ^^^


----------



## wicked (Sep 24, 2017)

This thread is another shining example of why Uber and Lyft will continue to exploit everyone.


----------



## possibledriver (Dec 16, 2014)

You can tell who the crazies are when they start slinging words like "statist tyranny" They want a land with no laws and the ability to exploit anyone they want. ayn rand was a novelist, not an expert on how to run a country. This ain't galt's gulch.



VictorD said:


> This ^^^


Freedom to not pay taxes, freedom to grow your hair, freedom to do whatever you want and harm anyone you want, freedom to create your own little militias and go hide in a hole out in the woods, freedom to read all the wm. johnstone books, freedom to watch your fox news funnies, yeah, We get it.


----------



## Carbuncle (Mar 29, 2019)

Cary Grant said:


> You're projecting. Nice try. You earned an F minus. Good luck, serf.


Prove it.


----------



## Seamus (Jun 21, 2018)

It’s not really any different than laws regulating what % lawyers can take as a fee in civil lawsuits. Abuses were taking place and government stepped in to regulate it.


----------



## Uber1111uber (Oct 21, 2017)

Guys the thread post is a very simple yes or no question, can you guys read? ?


----------



## Seamus (Jun 21, 2018)

Uber1111uber said:


> Guys the thread post is a very simple yes or no question, can you guys read? ?


Since you didn't answer "yes" or "no" either, I guess you read just as well as us!?

Besides, drivers are more like a band of Pirates! And you expect obedience on an Internet forum??


----------



## Nats121 (Jul 19, 2017)

UberBastid said:


> I always vote for freedom.
> Freedom of Uber to charge pax's what the market bears.
> Freedom of Uber to pay drivers what the market bears.
> 
> ...


https://gizmodo.com/uber-and-lyft-have-a-hot-new-idea-for-screwing-over-cit-1822661060

Save your "freedom" platitudes, because they're nothing more than hot air.

Uber and lyft are ENEMIES of free markets.

"Free market" uber and lyft want to BAN privately owned vehicles from city streets. Lyft CEO John Zimmer reiterated that goal a few weeks ago.

Uber was heavily involved in and probably crafted many of the laws governing rideshare.

Thanks to "free market" uber, rideshare drivers have been included in taxicab "destination discrimination" laws, which prohibits ride refusal based on destination.

Free market uber also helped craft the laws prohibiting drivers from accepting rides "off the app".

Uber and lyft are excellent examples of rent-seeking crony capitalism.

Uber and lyft treat their drivers like employees, yet they're allowed to benefit from the huge cost savings of classifying their drivers as independent contractors.



The Texan said:


> Look, I'm an U/L driver too, (for now anyways).
> 
> How in the HELL are you going to Tell a non govt. company what it can and can't charge, who gets what, etc.
> 
> ...


You're a little late. We already have many regulations, including minimum wage.

Anyway, the govt's immigration policy has put the drivers behind the eight ball. The govt allows perpetually large numbers of Third World immigrants to come to this country every year, which provides uber and lyft with a virtually limitless supply of replacement drivers.

Importing cheap labor makes a mockery of any pretense of a free market for labor.


----------



## Curiosa71 (Apr 8, 2019)

In a capitalist society/economy only those with "Capital" enjoy FREEDOM, the rest of us are all tied up trying to merely survive or stay a float. Freedom for us, non capitalist, is just an illusion, a mirage. Its our undeniable right as humans, freedom from the government interfering in our business, regulating our decisions, the Capitalist promote. Free to bear arms, so that you can continue to buy my products, arms to protect your freedom. Oversight is much needed in a capitalist society, because humans have exploited humans for personal gain since they've roamed the planet. If you are not a wealthy billionaire, you have no practical freedom, you have a mortgage, a student loan, a car loan, a credit card loan, a lease, bills for utilities and groceries, insurance payments, etc etc Unless you don't have to be employed or pensioned, you are delusional to believe you are free. Because everyone that is employed is being exploited by their employer, a lot more discreetly than U/L. What they are doing is predatory, they exploit the most needy with their lies and deceit, banking on their ignorance and their focus to survive that they hardly have the time and energy to analyze and strategize to their benefit the ridesharing business model. Yes, by passing a bill that dictates Uber and Lyft to share of fare to 25/75, it will take their freedom to prey on the most needy and unprivileged, and all the rest who just do it for the fun of it. We will be free when we no longer exploit for personal gain our fellow human being. FEEL FREE to DISAGREE and IGNORE


----------



## UberBastid (Oct 1, 2016)

Uber1111uber said:


> Guys the thread post is a very simple yes or no question, can you guys read? ?


yes


----------



## The Entomologist (Sep 23, 2018)

Hahaha wtf is this? freedom to rob people, kill people, shit on people?

Why would the shills talk about freedom when Uber doesn't give the so called freedom it preaches to the user, can I cancel? No, can I set my prices? No, can I see your source code? No, can I see where the rides are going? (lol well i can but just asking), No. See, being selective is not freedom and full freedom as a quality of life brings in anarchy, as much I'd love that notion, it would never work in today's society.

Uber has gone regulation free for so long and they have taken a dump on their lucky break, they dun goofed, now it's time for some severe and unusual punishment, if this goes through, start thinking on how you'll make up for what you are going to be losing given you already are losing a shitload of money (how?!!?! I don't even know how they piss their money).

Pointers for the shills trying to troll this topic: talk about how uber will fight legally, that's better and more realistic trolling.


----------



## possibledriver (Dec 16, 2014)

Nats121 said:


> https://gizmodo.com/uber-and-lyft-have-a-hot-new-idea-for-screwing-over-cit-1822661060
> 
> Save your "freedom" platitudes, because they're nothing more than hot air.
> 
> ...


Immigrants built the US.


----------



## hrswartz (Jan 4, 2019)

BigRedDriver said:


> Free to have a gun put against my head isn't really "freedom" though.


Who's puttin' a gun to your head? Uber... Lyft... the government... who...


----------



## Asificarewhatyoudontthink (Jul 6, 2017)

Pax Collector said:


> It usually takes one state to do the right thing and the rest will follow suit. Hopefully the bill passes.


New York City passed a minimum pay law...

Your logic has failed as it hasn't, unless I really missed something, been passed in any other cities or states.


----------



## hrswartz (Jan 4, 2019)

possibledriver said:


> Immigrants built the US.


And  stinks... your point is? Sorry sometimes I just cain't hep myself...


----------



## The Entomologist (Sep 23, 2018)

By laying low and not making themselves the boogie man of contracting (paying fair, developing actual tools for the app, creating intelligent design for the gig), all the crap they have learned about mocking government regulations could have easily jumped into labor itself (plumbers, mechanics, IT, hell... garbage men), they could have taken over and become the largest job agency in the world, but nah... they had to go for self driving cars (trying to bite the hand that feeds you), **** drivers, get sued to kingdom come, IP theft, hacking... list goes on really.

You had your chance to take over the world Uber, now it's time to start watching the tower fall in slow motion.


----------



## Uber1111uber (Oct 21, 2017)

My answer is yes ?


----------



## hrswartz (Jan 4, 2019)

Uber1111uber said:


> My answer is yes ?


To what? Will you be my valentine? just wonderin'


----------



## Pax Collector (Feb 18, 2018)

Asificarewhatyoudontthink said:


> New York City passed a minimum pay law...
> 
> Your logic has failed as it hasn't, unless I really missed something, been passed in any other cities or states.


Too early to draw that conclusion, don't you think?


----------



## Asificarewhatyoudontthink (Jul 6, 2017)

Pax Collector said:


> Too early to draw that conclusion, don't you think?


With the lawsuits to stop it from happening still rolling through the courts?

Nope.

Because they will just keep on steam rolling.

Like they already did, with their flagrant ignoring of existing Taxi laws.

I mean, shoot, have you even read the Florida TNC law and compared it to NYCs far stricter regulation...

Which laws "once adopted will spread" do you think the paying public wants to win?


----------



## Pax Collector (Feb 18, 2018)

Asificarewhatyoudontthink said:


> With the lawsuits to stop it from happening still rolling through the courts?
> 
> Nope.
> 
> ...


Rideshare is still in its infancy. More regulations and changes are to follow. Most of the problems you mentioned would be resolved over time. I wouldn't lose hope just yet.


----------



## Carbuncle (Mar 29, 2019)

hrswartz said:


> Who's puttin' a gun to your head? Uber... Lyft... the government... who...


I would have expected something more insightful and enlightened from someone rocking Clemens as his avatar.


----------



## beebob (Apr 9, 2019)

Most FT Uber drivers (not retirees, but those that look at uber as a career) lack ambition and frankly, are lazy.
Sitting and driving around in ur vehicles IS Tiring causing fatigue, however it is Not hard work (says the vet with 4+ years w/ U & L)

?In a free society those with Ambition can acquire a skill that
warrants higher pay. ?Learning a new skill takes Hard work

The average Uber driver would rather cry that ?
No one is handing them Opportunity on a silver platter rather than invest in his own future.

Opportunity to invest in yourselves for a lucrative future is all around u.
But u chose to cry foul and demand the government protect u.

ain't gonna happen?
Cause low skill will always get u low wage?
Guaranteed


----------



## hrswartz (Jan 4, 2019)

Carbuncle said:


> I would have expected something more insightful and enlightened from someone rocking Clemens as his avatar.


Sorry to let ya down, I am what I am and that's all that I am... I fall short on so many fronts... can you ever forgive me?


----------



## UberBeemer (Oct 23, 2015)

Pax Collector said:


> It usually takes one state to do the right thing and the rest will follow suit. Hopefully the bill passes.


At least states that are similarly progressive might follow suit.



UberBastid said:


> So, whats the answer? "From the mouths of babes", eh?
> 
> THAT'S a civil matter. Take it to civil court and get a judge to agree with you.
> But, don't sic the gov't on me.
> ...


Mostly agree. But, what are we free from? An even playing field? A profit for our troubles?

I would not want draconian intervention. But things like fingerprinting, driver cap, and maybe something that limits the crazy dispatch inconsistencies, would be a good thing.


----------



## hrswartz (Jan 4, 2019)

UberBeemer said:


> At least states that are similarly_ progressive_ might follow suit.


or regressive? Nothing PROgressive about the "progressive's" but, hey, we're galloping towards Socialism so what the heck, I might as well get on board and reap all the socialistic rewards I can... all that nonsense coming from one who advocates International union representation... sorry I don't know where I'm going with this post... I just woke up.


----------



## UberBeemer (Oct 23, 2015)

hrswartz said:


> or regressive? Nothing PROgressive about the "progressive's" but, hey, we're galloping towards Socialism so what the heck, I might as well get on board and reap all the socialistic rewards I can... all that nonsense coming from one who advocates International union representation... sorry I don't know where I'm going with this post... I just woke up.


If Pro is opposite of Con, what is the opposite of progress?
Congress.

Progressivism represents growth, maturation, and an adaptation to new ideas and changing times. Social programs benefit the greater good when implemented well. Socialism is just a scarey word to people with closed minds, in my opinion.


----------



## hrswartz (Jan 4, 2019)

Curiosa71 said:


> In a capitalist society/economy only those with "Capital" enjoy FREEDOM, the rest of us are all tied up trying to merely survive or stay a float. Freedom for us, non capitalist, is just an illusion, a mirage. Its our undeniable right as humans, freedom from the government interfering in our business, regulating our decisions, the Capitalist promote. Free to bear arms, so that you can continue to buy my products, arms to protect your freedom. Oversight is much needed in a capitalist society, because humans have exploited humans for personal gain since they've roamed the planet. If you are not a wealthy billionaire, you have no practical freedom, you have a mortgage, a student loan, a car loan, a credit card loan, a lease, bills for utilities and groceries, insurance payments, etc etc Unless you don't have to be employed or pensioned, you are delusional to believe you are free. Because everyone that is employed is being exploited by their employer, a lot more discreetly than U/L. What they are doing is predatory, they exploit the most needy with their lies and deceit, banking on their ignorance and their focus to survive that they hardly have the time and energy to analyze and strategize to their benefit the ridesharing business model. Yes, by passing a bill that dictates Uber and Lyft to share of fare to 25/75, it will take their freedom to prey on the most needy and unprivileged, and all the rest who just do it for the fun of it. We will be free when we no longer exploit for personal gain our fellow human being. FEEL FREE to DISAGREE and IGNORE


Ummmmm... Venezuela, Cuba, Russia, China, North Korea, Viet Nam, and a few others I've left out would be glad to have you drive there and in any one of those countries you could exercise the freedom we enjoy here... NOT. You don't know what you got till it's gone... viva la socialism... :thumbdown:... NOT...



UberBeemer said:


> If Pro is opposite of Con, what is the opposite of progress?
> Congress.
> 
> Progressivism represents growth, maturation, and an adaptation to new ideas and changing times. Social programs benefit the greater good when implemented well. Socialism is just a scarey word to people with closed minds, in my opinion.


 see my reply to Curiosa71 above I think that says it all concerning Socialism...


----------



## UberBastid (Oct 1, 2016)

The Entomologist said:


> Why would the shills talk about freedom when Uber doesn't give the so called freedom it preaches to the user,


Uber does not GIVE anyone freedom. 
God gives freedom.
Read the first paragraph of the Declaration of Independence.
"These truths are self evident".

I take freedom.
I insist on, and defend it with force.


----------



## hrswartz (Jan 4, 2019)

beebob said:


> Most FT Uber drivers (not retirees, but those that look at uber as a career) lack ambition and frankly, are lazy.
> Sitting and driving around in ur vehicles IS Tiring causing fatigue, however it is Not hard work (says the vet with 4+ years w/ U & L)
> 
> ?In a free society those with Ambition can acquire a skill that
> ...


t's hard to reject beebob's logic... so I won't, furthermore I'll give it a thumbs up







Well spoken!


----------



## Who is John Galt? (Sep 28, 2016)

UberBastid said:


> God gives freedom.


That is an interesting statement.
I suppose then, that God would also give you the freedom to believe or otherwise that man created him.

.


----------



## hrswartz (Jan 4, 2019)

Who is John Galt? said:


> That is an interesting statement.
> I suppose then that God would also give you the freedom to believe or otherwise that man created him.
> 
> .


You got it... That Sir is absolute freedom... just sayin


----------



## UberBeemer (Oct 23, 2015)

Its not hard at all, its just that its like swimming up a waterfall. Or arguing with anti-vaxers. Or Trump supporters. 

People who equate socialized programs always whip out these same examples, because they fear them. But take a look at other countries with social programs like healthcare and free university. Norway, is one example. They might pay higher taxes. But guess what, they're some of the happiest people on earth.


----------



## njn (Jan 23, 2016)

"If Uber is contending their insurance is worth thousands a year to a driver, why doesn’t it show in the fare breakdown? Also, why don’t they allow the driver to opt out of James River Insurance Company coverage so that they can obtain their own insurance?

Most rideshare drivers have rideshare gap insurance anyway."

The author has no clue. How many drivers are going to pay for commercial insurance like they have to in NYC?


----------



## UberBeemer (Oct 23, 2015)

We can't opt out because that coverage is for their liability exposure, not ours.


----------



## njn (Jan 23, 2016)

UberBeemer said:


> We can't opt out because that coverage is for their liability exposure, not ours.


Uber/lyft do not offer or provide insurance for NYC drivers. It is solely on the driver to purchase proper commercial insurance at a cost of $450/mo.


----------



## beebob (Apr 9, 2019)

UberBeemer said:


> We can't opt out because that coverage is for their liability exposure, not ours.


_"We can't opt out ................."_

However, you CAN delete the Uber driver's app and get a real J O B


----------



## UberBeemer (Oct 23, 2015)

beebob said:


> _"We can't opt out ................."_
> 
> However, you CAN delete the Uber driver's app and get a real J O B


That is always a choice.


----------



## hrswartz (Jan 4, 2019)

UberBeemer said:


> Its not hard at all, its just that its like swimming up a waterfall. Or arguing with anti-vaxers. Or Trump supporters.
> 
> People who equate socialized programs always whip out these same examples, because they fear them. But take a look at other countries with social programs like healthcare and free university. Norway, is one example. They might pay higher taxes. But guess what, they're some of the happiest people on earth.


`And you know this for a fact... How? Methinks this thread is heading to the Political thread thingy... One of, if not the greatest, freedoms we enjoy is that of disagreement without the fear of disappearing in the night... I vehemently disagree with your views on socialism... You correctly point out we capitalist use the same examples over and over. We use them, precisely, because they're valid examples... I have heard your argument about the Scandinavian country's socialism as many as you've heard mine... NOTHING in this world is free, with the exception of salvation, which another paid the price for, someone always has to foot the bill... You actually believe you can have FREE health care, FREE collage, FREE this, FREE that? Can an individual be more deceived? You state Norway pays higher taxes... just how much more taxes would you be willing to pay for all this freedom? Count me outa your utopian society... actually it doesn't exist...never will on this planet... just sayin'


----------



## UberBeemer (Oct 23, 2015)

Well you can google norway if you like, there are many stories and polls that support my point. And your use of Russia, etc., is amusing. I wonder why it was "ok" for them to help the president, but god forbid we have single payer healthcare. And really, when you say Russia, aren't you referring to USSR, the socialist union that crumbled some 20 years ago?

"CAPITALISTS!" yay. We aren't exactly 1%'ers here. Why align with those who like you to settle for low wages while they rig the rules to their advantage?


----------



## SLuz (Oct 20, 2016)

"Well, sometimes, especially with my Republican colleagues, they say things, and I'm like, what does that have to do with what we're talking about? There's this is one member (Rep. Roger Williams (R-Texas)) who famously, every single Financial Services Committee hearing, he says, "I ask everyone this, are you a capitalist or a socialist?" And like the person's, like, in charge of the National Flood Insurance Program -- they're, like, what?

And the best thing, too, is this -- you know, last week, he actually said, are you a capitalist or socialist? Yes or no? And the woman said, yes or no? And he says, yeah. And she goes, yes. (Laughter) And it was the whole panel -- and he made everyone go down and everyone said, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes.

And then I said, hey, it's great if we have a mixed economy. It's possible." -AOC


----------



## Carbuncle (Mar 29, 2019)

hrswartz said:


> Sorry to let ya down, I am what I am and that's all that I am... I fall short on so many fronts... can you ever forgive me?


Maybe. But Clemens was a hard ass about civil virtue so he probably wouldn't.



beebob said:


> Most FT Uber drivers (not retirees, but those that look at uber as a career) lack ambition and frankly, are lazy.
> Sitting and driving around in ur vehicles IS Tiring causing fatigue, however it is Not hard work (says the vet with 4+ years w/ U & L)
> 
> ?In a free society those with Ambition can acquire a skill that
> ...


Dude, you still don't get the bigger picture.

Even when I'm out of this garbage "gig" I want this POS company and industry regulated because I don't want to be driving on streets with thousands of road zombies who either aren't qualified and/or are being paid and treated so poorly that there's no way they can do the job safely.

You are COMPLETELY lacking in critical thinking skills.

I've posted numerous articles as well as academic and industry research documents here, all of which you have ignored.

The lazy one here is you.


----------



## hrswartz (Jan 4, 2019)

Carbuncle said:


> Maybe. But Clemens was a hard ass about civil virtue so he probably wouldn't.


Oh, you knew him? :whistling:


----------



## Carbuncle (Mar 29, 2019)

hrswartz said:


> Oh, you knew him? :whistling:


I know his work and life quite well. He's one of my favorite authors.

He was and still is one of the most highly regarded moral philosophers in history.


----------



## hrswartz (Jan 4, 2019)

:thumbup:


----------



## UberBastid (Oct 1, 2016)

UberBeemer said:


> Its not hard at all, its just that its like swimming up a waterfall. Or arguing with anti-vaxers. Or Trump supporters.
> 
> People who equate socialized programs always whip out these same examples, because they fear them. But take a look at other countries with social programs like healthcare and free university. Norway, is one example. They might pay higher taxes. But guess what, they're some of the happiest people on earth.


But, you wanna see some unhappy people?
You and your comrades try to make the US into a socialist utopia, and I guarantee that you will be most unhappy. It will never happen. Door to door fighting comrade - and there's more of us than there are of you.
So, whine all you want, protest, hire lawyers ... go for it.
This country is a representative democracy; always will be.
Don't like it?
Move to Norway. Be happy.


----------



## beebob (Apr 9, 2019)

Carbuncle said:


> Maybe. But Clemens was a hard ass about civil virtue so he probably wouldn't.
> 
> 
> Dude, you still don't get the bigger picture.
> ...


"_You are COMPLETELY lacking in critical thinking skills."_

.......said the Uber driver _???_


----------



## Carbuncle (Mar 29, 2019)

UberBastid said:


> But, you wanna see some unhappy people?
> You and your comrades try to make the US into a socialist utopia, and I guarantee that you will be most unhappy. It will never happen. Door to door fighting comrade - and there's more of us than there are of you.
> So, whine all you want, protest, hire lawyers ... go for it.
> This country is a representative democracy; always will be.
> ...


You're wrong across the board.

If the US was a true representative Democracy there'd be no electoral college and Hillary would have won.

The whole system is rigged by dark money and corporate interference.

PG&E is responsible for 17 of the last 21 CA wildfires and faces no penalty at all. Instead, the citizens and even the victims will be footing that bill.

"The [Fascist] government will accord full freedom to private enterprise and will abandon all intervention in private economy."
-Benito Mussolini



beebob said:


> "_You are COMPLETELY lacking in critical thinking skills."_
> 
> .......said the Uber driver _???_


You're trolling an Uber driver forum.

Not exactly indicative of someone with razor sharp critical thinking skills.

And you still haven't read any of the studies.

Don't be a Sedgwick - if you can help it:


----------



## hrswartz (Jan 4, 2019)

Carbuncle said:


> You're wrong across the board.
> 
> If the US was a true representative Democracy there'd be no electoral college and Hillary would have won.
> 
> ...


Yeah, stupid is forever... glad I'm just ugly.


----------



## beebob (Apr 9, 2019)

Carbuncle said:


> You're wrong across the board.
> 
> If the US was a true representative Democracy there'd be no electoral college and Hillary would have won.
> 
> ...


I recently read a study on boarder line personality disorder BPD.
U don't have to Thx me


----------



## Carbuncle (Mar 29, 2019)

beebob said:


> I recently read a study on boarder line personality disorder BPD.
> U don't have to Thx me


I'll thank you when you clap back with something original. I have dead relatives who mint better insults.


----------



## MiamiKid (May 24, 2016)

UberBastid said:


> I always vote for freedom.
> Freedom of Uber to charge pax's what the market bears.
> Freedom of Uber to pay drivers what the market bears.
> 
> ...


Strongly agree!! Therefore, pray it does NOT pass. Uber will pull out of Connecticut if it does.

And they should pull out.

Free Market Capitalism is the best path forward!



BigRedDriver said:


> Free to have a gun put against my head isn't really "freedom" though.


Irrelevant to the discussion.



The Texan said:


> Look, I'm an U/L driver too, (for now anyways).
> 
> How in the HELL are you going to Tell a non govt. company what it can and can't charge, who gets what, etc.
> 
> ...


Excellent response.



Curiosa71 said:


> In a capitalist society/economy only those with "Capital" enjoy FREEDOM, the rest of us are all tied up trying to merely survive or stay a float. Freedom for us, non capitalist, is just an illusion, a mirage. Its our undeniable right as humans, freedom from the government interfering in our business, regulating our decisions, the Capitalist promote. Free to bear arms, so that you can continue to buy my products, arms to protect your freedom. Oversight is much needed in a capitalist society, because humans have exploited humans for personal gain since they've roamed the planet. If you are not a wealthy billionaire, you have no practical freedom, you have a mortgage, a student loan, a car loan, a credit card loan, a lease, bills for utilities and groceries, insurance payments, etc etc Unless you don't have to be employed or pensioned, you are delusional to believe you are free. Because everyone that is employed is being exploited by their employer, a lot more discreetly than U/L. What they are doing is predatory, they exploit the most needy with their lies and deceit, banking on their ignorance and their focus to survive that they hardly have the time and energy to analyze and strategize to their benefit the ridesharing business model. Yes, by passing a bill that dictates Uber and Lyft to share of fare to 25/75, it will take their freedom to prey on the most needy and unprivileged, and all the rest who just do it for the fun of it. We will be free when we no longer exploit for personal gain our fellow human being. FEEL FREE to DISAGREE and IGNORE


Strongly DISAGREE!!!


----------



## Carbuncle (Mar 29, 2019)

MiamiKid said:


> Strongly agree!! Therefore, pray it does NOT pass. Uber will pull out of Connecticut if it does.
> 
> And they should pull out.
> 
> ...


You don't appear to know what free market capitalism is.

Any party denied the ability to negotiate the terms of employment is denied the ability to participate in a free market system.


----------



## BigRedDriver (Nov 28, 2018)

No Prisoners said:


> Sir I beg to differ. Someone posted this here. Uber took more than 75%.


After I saw that I went back and did a couple of days trips, both Uber and Lyft. I was amazed at what I saw. Anywhere from keeping 11% to as high as 67%.

Made .10 a mile more (with pax on board) with Uber, but the split astounded me.


----------



## possibledriver (Dec 16, 2014)

hrswartz said:


> And  stinks... your point is? Sorry sometimes I just cain't hep myself...


I'd rather work beside and live beside immigrants who work their asses off, live quietly than beside some white jackass who wants to **** off on the job and party and fight with his old lady at home. Immigrants are still building the country by rehabbing both old houses and business locations in bad neighborhoods. Chances are your ancestors immigrated to the US. Mine did If you're not a Native American then you have no space to ***** about immigrants. They want a better life just like we do.


----------



## Carbuncle (Mar 29, 2019)

possibledriver said:


> I'd rather work beside and live beside immigrants who work their asses off, live quietly than beside some white jackass who wants to @@@@ off on the job and party and fight with his old lady at home. Immigrants are still building the country by rehabbing both old houses and business locations in bad neighborhoods. Chances are your ancestors immigrated to the US. Mine did If you're not a Native American then you have no space to @@@@@ about immigrants. They want a better life just like we do.


I'm mostly in agreement but a lot of residential construction that immigrants do goes without pulling permits and I've seen a lot of very bad work done as a result, work that could kill people. Most immigrants don't have the proper training or familiarity with building codes in the US - especially CA - and when even a minor temblor hits ? falls apart.

Latin American building standards are virtually nonexistent, which is why so many people die when those countries get hit. The workers import their lack of training with them and it is often a problem.

Also, Democrats stump for immigrants not so much because they care about them but because they only care about supplying businesses with the cheapest labor they can get.

And go into any traffic court. It's almost exclusively immigrants because they're allowed to drive in the US without being even remotely adequately trained and tested to drive safely here. And now those same immigrants are being allowed to drive for Uber and Lyft. From what I've seen most of them are absolutely clueless about the rules of the road.

Immigrants in these and similar fields need to be adequately trained. Lives literately depend on it.


----------



## UberBeemer (Oct 23, 2015)

UberBastid said:


> But, you wanna see some unhappy people?
> You and your comrades try to make the US into a socialist utopia, and I guarantee that you will be most unhappy. It will never happen. Door to door fighting comrade - and there's more of us than there are of you.
> So, whine all you want, protest, hire lawyers ... go for it.
> This country is a representative democracy; always will be.
> ...


More of who? Polls show most people favor single payer health care. And though the concept seems "socialist", it is the best way to provide healthcare and rein in costs, if they can regulate the industries that are basically gouging us for medicines and such. "Socialized Healthcare" is a good thing. Ask any Canadian.

Canada manages it. Why can't we? And, would you really go "foor to door, fighting" because we all suddenly have good healthcare or affordable higher education? That seems like it would be foolish.

I think you are confusing socialist policies for such things with communism. It isn't the same.



SLuz said:


> "Well, sometimes, especially with my Republican colleagues, they say things, and I'm like, what does that have to do with what we're talking about? There's this is one member (Rep. Roger Williams (R-Texas)) who famously, every single Financial Services Committee hearing, he says, "I ask everyone this, are you a capitalist or a socialist?" And like the person's, like, in charge of the National Flood Insurance Program -- they're, like, what?
> 
> And the best thing, too, is this -- you know, last week, he actually said, are you a capitalist or socialist? Yes or no? And the woman said, yes or no? And he says, yeah. And she goes, yes. (Laughter) And it was the whole panel -- and he made everyone go down and everyone said, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes.
> 
> And then I said, hey, it's great if we have a mixed economy. It's possible." -AOC


That was classic. "Here is a multiple choice question, you may answer yes or no."

Lets face it. Any congressman that fights to retain the status quo is doing so for fear they lose the lobbyists funding for their campaign, not because they are looking out for you or me.

Like I said before, progressive thought leads to changes for the better, unless the cheese weasels in congress muck it up with loopholes and perks for the special interests.


----------



## MiamiKid (May 24, 2016)

Carbuncle said:


> Like I said, considerable research went into determining a safe floor on pay to reasonably ensure public safety. There are and have long been agencies that regulate this industry.
> 
> And when you start down the path of "Why not 80%? 85%? Which would you rather have?" you sound like a child.
> 
> ...


I suggest you consider other lines of work. This isn't for you. Most drivers, myself included, utilize Uber for supplemental income.

Most of us do not support government regulation.


Carbuncle said:


> You don't appear to know what free market capitalism is.
> 
> Any party denied the ability to negotiate the terms of employment is denied the ability to participate in a free market system.


Nope, understand Capitalism very well.

Then 


Carbuncle said:


> Your perspectives on this are naive and childish. Businesses are easily corrupted by their profit motives. Checks and balances are essentIal in all sectors of commerce and society to safeguard the public from nefarious market manipulations.
> 
> Uber and Lyft willfully endanger everyone's lives by paying so poorly that drivers cannot be reasonably expected to adequately maintain vehicles, get enough rest, eat well, or get enough exercise.
> 
> ...


Then feudalism all the way!!! ?????

Then 


Carbuncle said:


> Your perspectives on this are naive and childish. Businesses are easily corrupted by their profit motives. Checks and balances are essentIal in all sectors of commerce and society to safeguard the public from nefarious market manipulations.
> 
> Uber and Lyft willfully endanger everyone's lives by paying so poorly that drivers cannot be reasonably expected to adequately maintain vehicles, get enough rest, eat well, or get enough exercise.
> 
> ...


Then feudalism all the way!!! ?????


----------



## Carbuncle (Mar 29, 2019)

MiamiKid said:


> I suggest you consider other lines of work. This isn't for you. Most drivers, myself included, utilize Uber for supplemental income.
> 
> Most of us do not support government regulation.
> 
> ...


No, you don't clearly don't understand what capitalism is.

The failure to regulate these companies is precisely why they're getting away with inflicting so much harm on drivers and the economy at large. It's also why these companies are failing so spectacularly.

Only criminals and ignorant people oppose regulations.

And the only way anyone can do this job and make supplemental income is to cut corners.

You're fooling yourself.


----------



## No Prisoners (Mar 21, 2019)

The Entomologist said:


> All it takes is the right set up posted in the darknet and a nice fat bounty contributed by each driver giving a mere dollar, you'll see every hacker in the world trying to break in.


Would gladly contribute to the bounty. Wish POTUS would say "Russia, if you're listening, I hope you're able to find the 30,000 (3 million drivers) emails that are missing," 
Not kidding I would pay handsomely for that information.


----------



## MiamiKid (May 24, 2016)

Carbuncle said:


> No, you don't.
> 
> And the only way anyone can do this job and make supplemental income is to cut corners.
> 
> You're fooling yourself.


Well I say I do. And if this, absurd, bill passes, Uber will pull out of Connecticut. Guaranteed. And, of course, support Uber 100%!


----------



## Carbuncle (Mar 29, 2019)

MiamiKid said:


> Well I say I do. And if this, absurd, bill passes, Uber will pull out of Connecticut. Guaranteed. And, of course, support Uber 100%!


Good! Let them go. Guaranteed the void will be filled with newcomers. The demand is there. The supply will follow.

When Uber and Lyft cried like babies and left Austin the void was immediately filled with options that were much better for drivers. Uber and Lyft realized they were losing that market for good so they bribed the governor to against the will of the voters and let Uber and Lyft do whatever they wanted to.

You're choosing the wrong side of history.



MiamiKid said:


> Well I say I do. And if this, absurd, bill passes, Uber will pull out of Connecticut. Guaranteed. And, of course, support Uber 100%!


Any economic system that deprives any party or individual the right to negotiate the terms of their employment is not capitalism.

Look up "regulatory capture" if you really want to know why we're getting hosed.

And I have to ask if you have TNC insurance.


----------



## beebob (Apr 9, 2019)

UberBastid said:


> But, you wanna see some unhappy people?
> You and your comrades try to make the US into a socialist utopia, and I guarantee that you will be most unhappy. It will never happen. Door to door fighting comrade - and there's more of us than there are of you.
> So, whine all you want, protest, hire lawyers ... go for it.
> This country is a representative democracy; always will be.
> ...


Norway has no interest in low skill working poor immigration to their country.
If u have professional credentials, education and/or wealth: welcome to Norway.

Poor low skill Americans need not apply.
Americans are often under the misconception that other nations 
will welcome them.


----------



## Carbuncle (Mar 29, 2019)

beebob said:


> Norway has no interest in low skill working poor immigration to their country.
> If u have professional credentials, education and/or wealth: welcome to Norway.
> 
> Poor low skill Americans need not apply.
> ...


There are many countries that will take even marginally skilled Americans where the living is excellent and ultra low cost. Bali, Costa Rica, Chile, Japan, outer islands of the Philippines like Sebu, Peru, Panama... get a basic credential to teach English to people in those and other countries and you'll get your foot in the door.


----------



## MiamiKid (May 24, 2016)

Carbuncle said:


> No, you don't.
> 
> And the only way anyone can do this job and make supplemental income is to cut corners.
> 
> You're fooling yourself.





Carbuncle said:


> There are many countries that will take even marginally skilled Americans where the living is excellent and ultra low cost. Bali, Costa Rica, Chile, Japan, outer islands of the Philippines like Sebu, Peru, Panama... get a basic credential to teach English to people in those and other countries and you'll get your foot in the door.


Maybe you should consider moving to one of those countries.

I prefer American style Free Market Capitalism.


----------



## Carbuncle (Mar 29, 2019)

MiamiKid said:


> Maybe you should consider moving to one of those countries.
> 
> I prefer American style Free Market Capitalism.


America doesn't have free market capitalism. How, as an Uber driver, you haven't figured that out by now is astounding.

You're drinking waaaaaay too much Kool-Aid.

And I'm definitely working on getting out of this ? country.


----------



## beebob (Apr 9, 2019)

Carbuncle said:


> There are many countries that will take even marginally skilled Americans where the living is excellent and ultra low cost. Bali, Costa Rica, Chile, Japan, outer islands of the Philippines like Sebu, Peru, Panama... get a basic credential to teach English to people in those and other countries and you'll get your foot in the door.


The counties u reference are a FAR CRY from Norway ?? 
No thx U


----------



## Carbuncle (Mar 29, 2019)

beebob said:


> The counties u reference are a FAR CRY from Norway ??
> No thx U


Norway has ? for surf, Sponge Bob.


----------



## beebob (Apr 9, 2019)

Carbuncle said:


> Norway has ? for surf, Sponge Bob.


*......Not only that
But........*


----------



## MiamiKid (May 24, 2016)

Carbuncle said:


> America doesn't have free market capitalism. How, as an Uber driver, you haven't figured that out by now is astounding.
> 
> You're drinking waaaaaay too much Kool-Aid.
> 
> And I'm definitely working on getting out of this ? country.


Uber driving is strictly supplemental income stream when I need it. Am an investor and Capitalism serves me very well.

You go, I'll stay.


----------



## Carbuncle (Mar 29, 2019)

MiamiKid said:


> Uber driving is strictly supplemental income stream when I need it. Am an investor and Capitalism serves me very well.
> 
> You go, I'll stay.


You're not a very good investor if you think Uber provides quality supplemental income at these rates.

You must not be paying the proper insurance.


----------



## UberBastid (Oct 1, 2016)

beebob said:


> Norway has no interest in low skill working poor immigration to their country.
> If u have professional credentials, education and/or wealth: welcome to Norway.
> 
> Poor low skill Americans need not apply.
> ...


They sure as hell won't welcome sixth grade educated peons from So America.
But ... we should.


----------



## mbd (Aug 27, 2018)

I would rather have U/l tell the pax the cut percentage they are taking .
After the ride is complete, it should show how much driver got and how much uber got. If Uber takes 60%, the pax should know .


----------



## No Prisoners (Mar 21, 2019)

mbd said:


> I would rather have U/l tell the pax the cut percentage they are taking .
> After the ride is complete, it should show how much driver got and how much uber got. If Uber takes 60%, the pax should know .


This should be mandatory. lt should be clearly disclosed on passenger receipts. Thanks for the idea.


----------



## mbd (Aug 27, 2018)

No Prisoners said:


> This should be mandatory. lt should be clearly disclosed on passenger receipts. Thanks for the idea.


Tips will go up for sure


----------



## No Prisoners (Mar 21, 2019)

mbd said:


> Tips will go up for sure


U/L will fight this rule all the way to SCOTUS. Transparency is against their model. 
Such rule when disclosure of surge receipt would cause huge public rebuke and consumers would demand regulatory sanctions under price gouging laws. 
This is a brilliant idea. Really 
The whole business model would collapse.


----------



## goneubering (Aug 17, 2017)

No Prisoners said:


> U/L will fight this rule all the way to SCOTUS. Transparency is against their model.
> Such rule when disclosure of surge receipt would cause huge public rebuke and consumers would demand regulatory sanctions under price gouging laws.
> This is a brilliant idea. Really
> The whole business model would collapse.


You can only take down Uber if you capitalize the word GOUGING.


----------



## No Prisoners (Mar 21, 2019)

mbd said:


> I would rather have U/l tell the pax the cut percentage they are taking .
> After the ride is complete, it should show how much driver got and how much uber got. If Uber takes 60%, the pax should know .


Tweet went out. You're brilliant. Thanks


----------



## MiamiKid (May 24, 2016)

No Prisoners said:


> This should be mandatory. lt should be clearly disclosed on passenger receipts. Thanks for the idea.


Why don't all the complaining drivers just quit? So sick of the whiners. Fully support Uber's right to charge and pay what the market bears.

Free Market Capitalism!



No Prisoners said:


> U/L will fight this rule all the way to SCOTUS. Transparency is against their model.
> Such rule when disclosure of surge receipt would cause huge public rebuke and consumers would demand regulatory sanctions under price gouging laws.
> This is a brilliant idea. Really
> The whole business model would collapse.


Absolutely terrible idea. Uber has the right to operate their business without government interference.


----------



## No Prisoners (Mar 21, 2019)

MiamiKid said:


> Why don't all the complaining drivers just quit? So sick of the whiners. Fully support Uber's right to charge and pay what the market bears.
> 
> Free Market Capitalism!
> 
> ...


What is it Resistance is futile. I don't want government intervention. I look for true market forces at work. 
Drivers have more power than they've been lead to believe. The Borg is fallible and has weaknesses.
Watch


----------



## Kingmilkfart (Apr 22, 2019)

Carbuncle said:


> Your perspectives on this are naive and childish. Businesses are easily corrupted by their profit motives. Checks and balances are essentIal in all sectors of commerce and society to safeguard the public from nefarious market manipulations.
> 
> Uber and Lyft willfully endanger everyone's lives by paying so poorly that drivers cannot be reasonably expected to adequately maintain vehicles, get enough rest, eat well, or get enough exercise.
> 
> ...


Literally everything you just said was refuted and proven to be essentially nonsensical in the very post you wrongly called naive and childish and then attempted to form a valid response to.

You cited zero sources at all to back up your extremely bold claim of "no such thing as invisible hand....eats itself" etc. The fact that businesses fail and are replaced by better companies that people prefer in the long run is a fact of life and, sorry, refutes this entire claim.

Regulation is a good thing when it comes to mandatory work forces. It is not when that workforce is optional on all sides.

If you stepped out of your political science course at your most recent attempt at a bachelor's degree you would actually be able to learn that there are things such as Actuarial Sciences and economics using statistics. Whether or not a free capitalist Market will self-regulate or not is simply not up for debate. Yes there are chances that a corrupt conglomerate will run a muck and dominate a sector. And that is when regulation steps in to break up monopolies. But if you are saying that it is a overall good idea to have the government step in and tell a company what it is allowed to charge and what it is allowed to pay or what it must charge and what it must pay, you have absolutely no idea what kind of damage that will end up doing to the market as a whole in the long run. That is literally stifling any opportunity for future entrepreneurship or improvements upon that very Workforce from a new up-and-comer who does everything Uber does but better and without the government's hand guiding them on how to do it. There is a reason why people use Google more than they use Bing despite the fact that every computer running Windows goes way out of its way to force you to use Bing. Google as a search engine simply works better and people use it and are willing to bypass bang for this purpose and thus a larger Share of the market goes to Google as far as search engines go.

I am an Uber driver and it is very tempting and very comforting to entertain the idea that the government will force Uber to give me more money. However what you said about feudalism does nothing but show you don't really even understand what feudalism is. There are other options for people to do Rideshare work. The one that treats its drivers the most fairly, pays them the most money without sacrificing things like customer support or opportunity, will in the end come out on top. You would be far more likely to help those who you feel are being dominated by an evil Corporation by helping spread the word about a better option or alternative to Uber then you would be by arguing about a Marketplace which you clearly are lacking a fundamental understanding about.

If McDonald's decided to pay everyone who works at McDonald's $1 an hour tomorrow everyone at McDonald's would go to Burger King and Wendy's. In fact the publicity would be so terrible for them that's chances are the majority of the customers would refuse to purchase food from McDonald's purely out of principle. Whether you like it or not that is the free market in action in that is the free market that works.

In a feudalistic society, one cannot simply leave their Lord's fields to go work for another Lord. You are forced to stay on that land because the Lord provides everything that you need to live for you in exchange for your work on his land. I feel that the irony of this is lost at you, and in case it is lost on anyone else I will say that what you called feudalism and how you compared it to capitalism, is actually far more akin to the government regulation that you claim to be far superior to a free capitalist market then even you are aware of. When the government takes care of your house, your food, your car, your gas, your employer, and your employment, and any other ancillary things in your life, you are now working on a field for a feudal Lord which you cannot leave and you have no options or other land to go to.


----------



## itsablackmarket (May 12, 2015)

mbd said:


> I would rather have U/l tell the pax the cut percentage they are taking .
> After the ride is complete, it should show how much driver got and how much uber got. If Uber takes 60%, the pax should know .


Yup, this would show regular passengers how manipulative and greedy the company, charging them more unnecessarily and taking more from the driver on certain rides for no apparent reason.


----------



## driverdoug (Jun 11, 2017)

It is just insane to not accept this offer of help from the government. Uber is not operating in a free market. They were capitalized sufficiently to bend the market to their will.


----------



## SurgeMasterMN (Sep 10, 2016)

itsablackmarket said:


> Yup, this would show regular passengers how manipulative and greedy the company, charging them more unnecessarily and taking more from the driver on certain rides for no apparent reason.


Agreed ?


----------



## K girl 213 (Aug 20, 2015)

I think it helps passengers ultimately.


Misunderstood Pirate said:


> View attachment 314335


----------



## MiamiKid (May 24, 2016)

driverdoug said:


> It is just insane to not accept this offer of help from the government. Uber is not operating in a free market. They were capitalized sufficiently to bend the market to their will.


Uber and Capitalism working great for me!!


----------



## SurgeMasterMN (Sep 10, 2016)

Of course


----------



## peteyvavs (Nov 18, 2015)

Pax Collector said:


> It usually takes one state to do the right thing and the rest will follow suit. Hopefully the bill passes.


Not one State followed N.Y. After they passed a guarantee of a livable wage.



MiamiKid said:


> Uber and Capitalism working great for me!!


LMMFAO, spoken like someone who lives in a trailer park.


----------



## Pax Collector (Feb 18, 2018)

peteyvavs said:


> Not one State followed N.Y. After they passed a guarantee of a livable wage.


Patience my friend, patience.


----------



## SurgeMasterMN (Sep 10, 2016)

Pax Collector said:


> Patience my friend, patience.


Tru


----------



## nouberipo (Jul 24, 2018)

No Prisoners said:


> Really trying to stay out of this futile discussion. But just imagine if the government regulates uber and enforces any limits as to what it can charge or pay.
> Then where will it stop.
> Should Apple be forced to a limit price of its products. How about GM, or McDonalds, or Chanel.
> The problem with Uber's business model progressively decreasing driver rates is not to be decided by the government. The problem is not Uber. The problem is that drivers take it.
> ...


you obviously aren't aware of how taxis are regulated in terms of how much they can charge.....Apple doesn't pay their employees under minimum wage and ask their to use their own resources in the process, GM doesn't pay their employees under federal minimum wage and ask theme to use their own resources in the process, McDonalds doesn't pay their employees under minimum wage and ask them to use their own resources in the process, and Chanel doesn't pay their employees under minimum gage and ask them to use their own resources in the process. In fact, most of the companies you mention offer benefits including healthcare.

Employees of Apple, GM, McDonalds, Chanel dont' have to pay employee AND employer taxes.

So yes, Uber and Lyft have unethically managed to create third-world conditions in the first world. I have lived in the third world and the first world and one of the keys is the economic disparity between the top and bottom. Recent data indicates that the United States is number one in terms of economic inequality thus the road to third world stature is being paved and I see companies such as Uber and Lyft at the forefront of creating this new race to the bottom. Without regulation we will become a banana republic.


----------



## No Prisoners (Mar 21, 2019)

While the government may not be able to regulate uber's model for how it compensates independent contractors, states can file cases against uber for violating anti price gouging rules. In discovery and subpoenas of current and previous tech employees it will be evident that Uber uses algorithm to artificially increase rates to passengers. Utility companies cannot arbitrarily increase rates based on analyzed data of consumers that determine how and when to increase rates. Example, diabetic has a meal or a woman goes into labor, or a person exercising. 
Uber uses data such as battery capacity, time and location, type of neighborhood, income capacity, habits. 
Surging prices to riders while only paying drivers a fraction demonstrates that surge is not necessary to increase drivers in a specific area. Uber now surges riders without a hint on drivers app about surges. 
There are ways to take on uber without a long struggle with lobbied politicians. 
Drivers can expose uber by distribution through social media of screen prints of trip statements, exchange information with passengers, demand transparency. 
One rule that should be enforced is to make uber and lyft disclose detailed ride receipts to passengers. Including time, miles, driver pay and company share of fares. 
This will cause an uproar among riders and consequently make uber's model to implode.


----------



## Stevie The magic Unicorn (Apr 3, 2018)

I see this law passing.

Orlando for instance has a law (city ordinance but close enough) limiting taxi rental cost. IE the maximum a cab company can charge its drivers to rent a taxi.

(One company out of 4 or 5 total charges the limit on less than half its cabs, everyone else gets charged less)

I rent a “dispatch/streethail only” car that is $50 less than the daily maximum.

The max only gets charged to airport cars (at the most in demand time) to incentivize the cars that don’t have airport stickers.


If Orlando can pass that (with quite honestly no public support or even knowledge or what’s going on) whomever can pass a law setting driver pay at 75% or the Uber/lyft fare all the time.

Frankly... asking for what Uber/lyft used to advertise way back when shouldn’t be too much to ask for. The politicians might just vote for it not knowing that Uber takes more than 25% currently. (Yes I do beleive politicians are that stupid)

The harder Uber fights it the more everyone is going to see Uber for what they are.


----------



## SurgeMasterMN (Sep 10, 2016)

Stevie The magic Unicorn said:


> I see this law passing.
> 
> Orlando for instance has a law (city ordinance but close enough) limiting taxi rental cost. IE the maximum a cab company can charge its drivers to rent a taxi.
> 
> ...


Truth


----------



## dryverjohn (Jun 3, 2018)

Seamus said:


> It's not really any different than laws regulating what % lawyers can take as a fee in civil lawsuits. Abuses were taking place and government stepped in to regulate it.


43% to the lawyer, not really sure how much that protected the client in a multi million dollar personal injury lawsuit.


----------



## Seamus (Jun 21, 2018)

dryverjohn said:


> 43% to the lawyer, not really sure how much that protected the client in a multi million dollar personal injury lawsuit.


You may not like the limit but at least there is one now. Used to be much worse.


----------



## dryverjohn (Jun 3, 2018)

Seamus said:


> You may not like the limit but at least there is one now. Used to be much worse.


When lawyers make laws who really wins? It's no different than congress voting for their own pay raise, really?


----------



## comitatus1 (Mar 22, 2018)

UberBastid said:


> I always vote for freedom.
> Freedom of Uber to charge pax's what the market bears.
> Freedom of Uber to pay drivers what the market bears.
> 
> ...


You are completely ignorant of history. And stupid.

I bet you don't believe in the Bill of Rights either.

Dumbass.

Chris


----------



## C4TNPlyft (Apr 11, 2019)

SurgeMasterMN said:


> https://bentcorner.com/law-uber-lyft-drivers-75-percent/


Lyft is already charging us for insurance! I get 10 cents less per mile because of insurance reasons... Even though I've never been in an accident since WAY before driving for them!


----------



## Sly (Aug 30, 2014)

UberBastid said:


> I always vote for freedom.
> Freedom of Uber to charge pax's what the market bears.
> Freedom of Uber to pay drivers what the market bears.
> 
> ...


Fine why hasn't someone created a business model where they charge admin fees to administrate a network and allow it's members to keep the bulk of the proceeds? Both Uber and Lyft would go broke.


----------



## Cynergie (Apr 10, 2017)

SurgeMasterMN said:


> Understood ?
> 
> Maybe instead of a bill someone can organize a Drivers Club to negotiate pay. Anyone else with ideas cause Uber and Lyft will keep bending us over till we tap out then the industry is left with poor quality drivers and service.
> 
> I am a free market capitalist as well but u as a driver have to agree where they started their rate take several years ago and where they are now is ridiculous. I would never argue for my own rate cut so I do not understand your logic other than standing firm on a political point. Hey I voted Trump also and will vote for him again but we need more of the take as drivers.



The Rideshare sector was conceived as a gig economy.
A gig economy is one that provides *TEMPORARY employment positions* and creates *fluid work contracts for short-term engagements *
Rideshare drivers are consequently classified as gig economy workers. By default of this
*Rideshare was NEVER intended to evolve into the full time profession rideshare workers have made it to be. It was designed to be a supplemental PART TIME -- not primary-- source of income.* Which means
Rideshare drivers are INDEPENDENT CONTRACTORS. They are NOT traditional Uber/Lyft employees, do not have payroll taxes deducted, and so do not receive a traditional W-2 from LyfUber. Consequently,
As independent contractors, rideshare drivers are NOT covered under most federal employment statutes. So the concept of any protection from federal employment statues DO NOT APPLY. By default of this labor status, any independent contractor labor organization aka driver clubs and/or unionization gets even more complicated and challenging to implement. So expect passage of said bill to follow suit.
Rideshare contract terms are written by LyfUber legal department. For the benefit of LyfUber/all LyfUber employees and mutally exclusive to rideshare contractors. And so are designed to favor LyfUber where potential employment/labor disputes like the discussions in this thread are concerned.
Rideshare drivers are 100% disposable labor resources (as LyfUber deactivations prove) and are in process of being phased out with IT via driverless vehicle technology. Once this IT becomes a viable market product, the human element of the rideshare phenomenon will be obsoleted.
Passing that bill is going to take some serious $$$ in lobbying on part of rideshare drivers as a collective organization. Who, by default of their PT, minimum wage work status, are likely going to be collectively broke on a national basis. So best start a collection fund to save up ASAP. But know that LyfUber also possesses similar lobbying resources. And that for ever $1 said rideshare driver fund collects towards lobbying said bill, LyfUber is likely matching funding with $1000......

If 1,000 rideshare drivers nationwide were to donate exactly $1 to such a pro driver lobby fund, LyfUber would be donating $1 Million lobbying Congress to protect their corporate labor interests (particularly their IPO which their bloated rideshare driver labor force continues to harm) at the national level. So best of luck on lobbying that bill at the state level. Assuming it can find the desk of the least corrupt state politician who possess a moral conscience that is.....

ps: Know that you have the right as a rideshare driver to punish LyfUber where it hurts the most i.e their free independent contractor labor pool. By permanently and proactively removing said free labor pool. Opting to walk away from said gig economy and obtaining traditional/self employment in another labor sector.



No Prisoners said:


> Sir I beg to differ. Someone posted this here. Uber took more than 75%.


And the reason for that is because they CAN.

And will continue doing so in the future because they CAN.

Because rideshare drivers are not traditional LyfUber employees. So LyfUber CAN.

Rideshare drivers are temporary gig economy workers.

Repeat: as a rideshare driver, you provide a cheap, unskilled, and disposable labor source for LyfUber. The simple fact they can deactivate drivers at whim -- with zero penalty from any industry/government overight/regulation -- is 100% proof of this.

** Striking will not rectify the fact you're a cheap, unskilled and highly disposable source of labor.
* Organizing into formal labor associations/unions will not rectify the fact you're a cheap, unskilled and highly disposable source of labor. 
* Lobbying politicians/Congress at the state/national level will not rectify the fact you're a cheap, unskilled and highly disposable source of labor.*

An inconvenient reality which apparently still continues to elude many LyfUber drivers who actually believe they're being exploited by the system.


----------

