Kinja reply list

Read More
gramercypoliceBrendan O'Connor
7/25/15 10:47am
It was funny the other night on Chris Hayes, when he had some Uber mouthpiece going on about the amazing innovation of Uber’s sharing economy and Hayes finally cut him off and said, “You’re charging people for a ride in your car. People have been doing that for over a hundred years, and in carriages for hundreds of years before that. There’s nothing especially innovative about charging people for a ride. And the local governments have a responsibility to make sure their citizens know those rides are safe and fair. Other than adding a phone app, what’s your big innovation and why shouldn’t Uber operate under the same rules as every other taxi provider?” And the Uber mouthpiece just stared at the camera, stung because nobody, apparently, ever confronted him with the truth.

Uber’s app is nice. Taxi companies should adopt something similar. But the only other innovation they offer is, they take money that would normally and historically stay in the local economy and move it to Silicon Valley. The real goal of most tech companies seems to be to convince people in the rest of the country to send their money to Silicon Valley and Seattle for services they were already receiving from local businesses.
Reply
- Read More
  DennyCranegramercypolice
  7/25/15 11:00am
  I keep thinking that cities should consider investing in creating Uber-like applications themselves.
  Reply
- Read More
  R-NBAsucksgramercypolice
  7/25/15 11:57am
  Omg, you saw it too?? Nice! And did you see his takedown of the “sharing economy” as well where he said nothing was being shared because people were still paying for goods and services. I’m so surprised someone else caught that because people rarely watch MSNBC even though they have great programming.
  Reply
Read More
KelleysHeroBrendan O'Connor
7/25/15 10:38am
I hope Uber loses in the courts. Not because of what they do, which I find useful, but because of all the similar companies out there that manipulate employees that do not know better. My secretary formally worked as newspaper delivery and was classified as a private contractor. She was busting her ass at 3 am but this shisty company that “wasn’t her employer” didn’t have to pay taxes on her measly wage. They also had absurd regulations that were on the edge of labor laws but most people working these routes had less than hs education.
Reply
- Read More
  benjaminalloverKelleysHero
  7/25/15 10:45am
  She was busting her ass at 3 am but this shisty company that “wasn’t her employer” didn’t have to pay taxes on her measly wage.
  
  The “sharing” economy is great for tax evasion!
  
  They also had absurd regulations that were on the edge of labor laws but most people working these routes had less than hs education.
  
  That’s disruptive!
  Reply
- Read More
  EvanrudeJohnsonKelleysHero
  7/25/15 11:12am
  A newspaper company is far more of an employer than Uber. Who is and isn’t an employee isn’t a black and white issue, but with Uber, the way the laws are now (at least for the IRS, state statutes may be different), drivers are most certainly contractors. They use their own tools, they set their own hours, and they can work for more than one company.
  Reply
Read More
ScottBrendan O'Connor
7/25/15 10:37am
GOOD LORD, EVERYONE LOVES UBER. FUCK YOU GAWKER. WHO LIKES YOU? Well I do, but srsly have you ever been outside in a big city? There’s no clamoring for less Uber. Seriously, get over it.
Reply
- Read More
  2DollarzScott
  7/25/15 10:42am
  Hot take!
  Reply
- Read More
  Kaye Syrah SyrahScott
  7/25/15 10:57am
  Uh.
  Reply
Read More
PeteRRBrendan O'Connor
7/25/15 10:45am
The author must be 11 years old. Every popular product gets defended by the consumers who are loyal to it.

“Uber’s relentless campaign against the city’s efforts to suppress it”

Imagine that, a company not wanting to be forced out of business by a politician doing the bidding of their dinosaur-like competition.
Reply
- Read More
  Snake LipssynkPeteRR
  7/25/15 2:16pm
  Imagine that, another multinational touting regulation dodging, tax avoidance, and labor market disruption as innovation and efficiency.
  Reply
- Read More
  RandomEventsSnake Lipssynk
  7/25/15 5:03pm
  The first thing to come to mind is sugar companies and Dole.
  Reply
Read More
EvanrudeJohnsonBrendan O'Connor
7/25/15 11:25am
The taxi industry relied upon corruption, government protection and political bribes to retain its position. For years, people complained about how racist cabbies are for not picking up minorities, even the ones Joe Biden would consider “clean and articulate”, they set extremely high barriers to enter the market which allowed them to overcharge. You provide a shitty product at a shitty price, something will take you out before too long. (Look at the US carmakers offerings back in the day).

From the NYT article:

But of course growth like that might never have occurred if the city’s yellow-taxi system could respond to fluctuations of supply and demand. Instead, arcane aspects of state and local law and, crucially, the power wielded by wealthy and politically generous fleet owners — who don’t want to see the creation of more medallions lest the value of theirs decline — make that virtually impossible.
Reply
Read More
2DollarzBrendan O'Connor
7/25/15 10:38am
We are all Uber
Reply
- Read More
  IAmNotADamnWriter2Dollarz
  7/25/15 10:49am
  “Über, Über, Über über alles!”
  Reply
Read More
Medieval KnievelBrendan O'Connor
7/25/15 11:28am
This is nothing new.

“The chief business of the American people is business.” — Calcin Coolidge

“What was good for the country was good for General Motors and vice versa.” “Engine Charlie” Wilson
Reply
Read More
Dan SeitzBrendan O'Connor
7/26/15 9:56am
Yeah, whenever a “sharing economy” company sends me a little note trying to “crowdsource” some sort of action, I just laugh. Just suck it up, guys; if you don’t accept some regulation now, the labor market will inevitably turn around and force you to implement yourself.
Reply