Life Behind the Wheel

[thriftyandboringinohio]

Re: Cali's Commercial Gambit

Thanks darrigg, I read that appeals court verdict at your link.
Whatever else you might say about Papa John's, they certainly do not lack chutzpah.

First, for demanding the kid's insurance company pay Papa John's legal costs even after Allstate paid the claim for a hundred grand to the accident victim.
And second, for thinking they could out-lawyer a major insurance company like Allstate about what a policy does or does not cover.
Shameless. Unabashed. Cheeky. Greedy. Foolish.

[thriftyandboringinohio]

Re: Cali's Commercial Gambit

... Just because it happens on a smart phone or "the cloud" doesn't make it new, novel...... If your business plan violates the law it's not a viable plan.

+1,
Sadly, such schemes can make big money, at least for a while.
I view it as another example of the broader lying and cheating that goes on ever more frequently among a certain sort of business person.

They can make money if they violate a law, so they insist that by calling it a different name the law does not apply.

It's not loan, it's a payday advance.
It's not an employee, it's an independent contractor.
It's not fraudulent second claim against collateral already pledged, it's rehypothecation.
It's not a taxi, it's an on-demand ride sharing service.

As an old hillbilly once said with a scowl, "Go pee down someone else's leg and tell THEM it's raining."

[don]

Re: Cali's Commercial Gambit

+1,
Sadly, such schemes can make big money, at least for a while.
I view it as another example of the broader lying and cheating that goes on ever more frequently among a certain sort of business person.

They can make money if they violate a law, so they insist that by calling it a different name the law does not apply.

It's not loan, it's a payday advance.
It's not an employee, it's an independent contractor.
It's not fraudulent second claim against collateral already pledged, it's rehypothecation.
It's not a taxi, it's an on-demand ride sharing service.

As an old hillbilly once said with a scowl, "Go pee down someone else's leg and tell THEM it's raining."

+1

It's not slave labor, it's Labor Arbitrage

[DSpencer]

Re: Cali's Commercial Gambit

Is there anyone here that has taken a dozen or more taxi rides and a dozen or more Uber rides in the last few years that believes the customer experience is comparable? From my experience and everyone I've talked to the superiority of the Uber experience is undeniable. It's not just about the app either. In fact I would say that's only about half or maybe less of it.

The cars are nicer, cleaner, smell better.
The drivers are more polite, speak fluent english, smell better.
The Uber drivers drive their car like it's their car. Taxi drivers drive so maniacally that they inspired a series of video games called "Crazy Taxi".

I have a hard time believing that anyone who thinks riding in a taxi is safer than riding in an Uber has actually ridden in both. News Flash: Most taxi drivers also have cell phones and are constantly on them.

This isn't to say that every taxi is bad. And I agree that everyone should play by the same rules. However, when the rules are designed to kill competition and have resulted in the terrible taxi experience that is far too common, maybe we should consider whether to kill Uber with new and better enforced rules or get rid of them so we can all have a better experience.

[DSpencer]

Re: Life Behind the Wheel

That would be a good thing IMO. Most drivers today have become too stupid to be trusted with such responsibility.

Twenty years ago people somehow managed to drive without cellphones. In some states it was even illegal to drive while eating or drinking beverages. It was understood that when operating a multi-ton steel missile with the capacity to kill people, driving SAFELY should be the ONLY priority.

Now, the priorities are to take that call, send that call, get a fare, read that Facebook like, respond to that offending tweet...

Every driver holds the lives of strangers in their hands. Most people don't think about that until someone gets killed, like my husband. Driving is treated like a video game with no real-life consequences for miscalculation.

Using a cellphone, whether handheld or remote, while driving impairs the driver as badly as being drunk. Drunk driving is against the law. So should cellphones be while driving. Period. The only reason they're allowed is lobbying from the industry and the denial of drivers who value convenience over safety: "Other people might be impaired while using a cellphone while driving, but I'm not!"

There are a million justifications for why cellphones should be allowed while driving, but with the consequences for failure being so serious, those justifications are nothing more than rationalizations for selfishness. We have become a society of convenience-addicted, "me first" narcissists.

In the name of accuracy I feel compelled to point out that the "as badly as being drunk" refers to someone just above the minimum legal limit. Most drunk driving accidents occur when people are significantly above the .08 threshold.

It's interesting that you bring up the laws on eating and drinking. I have found it intriguing that in recent years the drive to ban cell phones while driving has seemingly died. Now all the focus is on stopping texting while driving. It seems we quickly found a habit so much more dangerous, that complaining about talking on the phone seems almost quaint.

If the true cause of distraction is not solved by hands free phones then should we also ban talking to passengers while driving? What about listening to a book on tape? Fiddling with the radio or GPS? My only point is that it is hard to know where to draw the line.

To EJ's point I do sometimes give dirty looks and head shakes to people driving like morons because they are staring into their phones. However, I do fear the irony of wrecking my own car while honking and gesturing about someone else's driving.

[Polish_Silver]

Re: Life Behind the Wheel

In

If the true cause of distraction is not solved by hands free phones then should we also ban talking to passengers while driving? What about listening to a book on tape? Fiddling with the radio or GPS? My only point is that it is hard to know where to draw the line.

To EJ's point I do sometimes give dirty looks and head shakes to people driving like morons because they are staring into their phones. However, I do fear the irony of wrecking my own car while honking and gesturing about someone else's driving.

There were some "experts" on NPR a few weeks ago. It turns out talking to a fellow passenger actually reduces the accident rate. Two pairs of eyes looking out. Also, your attention is still "within the car" instead of some place completely unrelated to the car. Texting is asking for an accident, talking on the cell phone is not AS bad. I drove many hours with books on tape, and find it much less distracting than using a phone.

Uber needs to figure out a way to prevent drivers from competing for fares by risking lives. Maybe the car has to be stopped to receive a call. The 15s rule is ridiculous.

[GRG55]

Re: Life Behind the Wheel

Uber is becoming a finance company as well as a logistics company. They will be financing vehicles for their drivers at uber low rates as long as those drivers meet their commitments to the company during the finance period. Can Uber commercial insurance be far behind? Won't Uber drivers be required to get a commercial drivers license? All of this will evolve over time and some bad things will happen to some Uber drivers and passengers along the way but this change is too big to be stopped. You can track the ticker, TAXI, to see a reasonable proxy for the value of a NYC taxi medallion. It hasn't been a good year to invest in one.

I am a relatively slow adopter of new technology, preferring to avoid the frustration of dealing with the bugs (hardware, software, process), but I also think these types of changes are not going away.

The introduction of information technology is continually bumping into a legal structure designed around the "old" economy. If you are planning a short trip on the weekend to a nearby city and put up a notice on your church bulletin board to see if anyone else wishes to travel that route and share costs there is apparently nothing illegal about that. But if the same connection is made using an app on the web apparently some insurance companies view that as a commercial transaction and in violation of their policy coverage. Of course these outdated laws are going to get challenged. The tide is coming in regardless of anyone that would prefer otherwise.

[dcarrigg]

Re: Life Behind the Wheel

I am a relatively slow adopter of new technology, preferring to avoid the frustration of dealing with the bugs (hardware, software, process), but I also think these types of changes are not going away.

The introduction of information technology is continually bumping into a legal structure designed around the "old" economy. If you are planning a short trip on the weekend to a nearby city and put up a notice on your church bulletin board to see if anyone else wishes to travel that route and share costs there is apparently nothing illegal about that. But if the same connection is made using an app on the web apparently some insurance companies view that as a commercial transaction and in violation of their policy coverage. Of course these outdated laws are going to get challenged. The tide is coming in regardless of anyone that would prefer otherwise.

I disagree completely.

The difference is commerce. That's why it's a "commercial" policy.

You could post on Craigslist that you were doing a ride just as easily as you could a church bulletin board. But you're not trying to engage in commerce. You're not running a company. You're not trying to make a buck. You're actually ride-sharing.

You're not running an international taxi service and pretending you're not by calling it ride-sharing.

You couldn't run a gypsy cab service off a church bulletin board in the 80s. You had to be smarter and more underground than that. I mean, you can post for a ride share in a church. But you can't post notices all around the church bulletin board that you'll drive people around for $2 per minute + $0.50 per mile. That would be illegal before the internet, and it's illegal now either way.

Because it's commerce.

Sharing and commerce are two different things, despite the Valley's marketing attempts to blur the definitions between the two.

In one instance, you split costs. In the other you charge more than it costs you in an attempt to earn a profit.

It's when you try to make a multi-billion dollar for-profit company out of it that the game changes.

If the "sharing economy" actually had anything to do with sharing, I think you'd have a point.

But it has more to do with making massive profit off employee misclassificaiton, risk-shifting, and depreciating others' capital goods.

[vt]

Re: Life Behind the Wheel

Excellent explanation DC.

[lektrode]

Re: Life Behind the Wheel

....
In one instance, you split costs. In the other you charge more than it costs you in an attempt to earn a profit.

It's when you try to make a multi-billion dollar for-profit company out of it that the game changes.

If the "sharing economy" actually had anything to do with sharing, I think you'd have a point.

But it has more to do with making massive profit off employee misclassificaiton, risk-shifting, and depreciating others' capital goods.

1 +1 = 2
(esp that 'feature' of depreciating the other dude's car(s) - thats the 'sharing' part that sounds to me like an awful lot like 'privatize the profit/socialize the risk' that we keep getting stuck with in 'other sectors' ...too.)

never mind when 'a website and an app' = worth... 'pre-ipo'...

how much?!?

40bil?

vs companies that own 1000's to TENS OF THOUSANDS of acres of prime developed industrial land, covered with MILLIONS of sqft of prime manufacturing facilities ?

guess we can guess from whence it comes

[dcarrigg]

Re: Life Behind the Wheel

1 +1 = 2
(esp that 'feature' of depreciating the other dude's car(s) - thats the 'sharing' part that sounds to me like an awful lot like 'privatize the profit/socialize the risk' that we keep getting stuck with in 'other sectors' ...too.)

never mind when 'a website and an app' = worth... 'pre-ipo'...

how much?!?

40bil?

vs companies that own 1000's to TENS OF THOUSANDS of acres of prime developed industrial land, covered with MILLIONS of sqft of prime manufacturing facilities ?

guess we can guess from whence it comes

Waaaaaait for it.....

[lektrode]

Re: Life Behind the Wheel

Waaaaaait for it.....
....

ayuh... EXACTLY.

[DSpencer]

Re: Life Behind the Wheel

Uber needs to figure out a way to prevent drivers from competing for fares by risking lives. Maybe the car has to be stopped to receive a call. The 15s rule is ridiculous.

But why just Uber? Regular taxi drivers take phone calls all the time and never pull over to do so.

[DSpencer]

Re: Life Behind the Wheel

1 +1 = 2
(esp that 'feature' of depreciating the other dude's car(s) - thats the 'sharing' part that sounds to me like an awful lot like 'privatize the profit/socialize the risk' that we keep getting stuck with in 'other sectors' ...too.)

Please explain how someone voluntarily using their own vehicle to earn money is equivalent to "privatize the profit/socialize the risk"

[Polish_Silver]

Re: Life Behind the Wheel

But why just Uber? Regular taxi drivers take phone calls all the time and never pull over to do so.

I think you are right. It's been so long since I used a taxi I have forgotten what it is like.