• Welcome to OGBoards 10.0, keep in mind that we will be making LOTS of changes to smooth out the experience here and make it as close as possible functionally to the old software, but feel free to drop suggestions or requests in the Tech Support subforum!

Uber/Lyft

RJKarl said:
Then, you shouldn't be worried if they have to follow logical regulations.

Using your logic, restaurants shouldn't have to follow health regulations if you like their food.

Using your logic, elevators shouldn't have to be inspected as you haven't crashed in one.

The fact that Uber/Lyft provide better, more pleasant service would keep them as better competitors if they had to follow the same rules cabs, shuttles and limos do.
Click to expand...

Goddamn, dude. You're hard R retarded. Wow.

Who hurt you?
 
JuiceCrewAllStar said:
the real problem is that in America, car is king and our public transit is shit

good public transit and you don't need these services nearly as much
Click to expand...

Agreed. I’d give my left nut to have a competent interstate train system. One of my favorite things about traveling through Europe.
 
BillBrasky said:
Agreed. I’d give my left nut to have a competent interstate train system. One of my favorite things about traveling through Europe.
Click to expand...

Gazillions of dollars in federal money subsidizing road building. Until recently, railroad infrastructure was all done with private funds.
 
RJKarl said:
They should have to take the tests as cabbies do. They should have to be vetted the same way limo or shuttle drivers are to go to airports as well as pay the same fees.

That's a start.
Click to expand...
Why should they have to? They are generally cleaner and safer forms of transportation anyways. If as a consumer you feel otherwise and would like to take a cab, go for it.
 
WFcatamount22 said:
Why should they have to? They are generally cleaner and safer forms of transportation anyways. If as a consumer you feel otherwise and would like to take a cab, go for it.
Click to expand...

Then why should a fake airplane pilot who has done well not have to qualify? Or lawyer?

Here's a small list of crimes committed by Uber or Lyft drivers. https://www.atchisontransport.com/blog/reported-list-of-incidents-involving-uber-and-lyft/

Here's another story about 120 sexual assaults: https://www.newsweek.com/uber-and-l...e-120-rapes-and-sexual-assaults-report-906544

Uber and Lyft need to be fully responsible for the actions of those people.
 
Wait, can I get an airplane pilot through Uber ?
 
So in RJ's analogy, the taxi driver is the expert ex-military pilot and the Uber/Lyft driver is the unlicensed, drunken Farmer Fred crop-duster who's going to fly your PJ into a mountain. Did I get that right?
 
tigerswood said:
So in RJ's analogy, the taxi driver is the expert ex-military pilot and the Uber/Lyft driver is the unlicensed, drunken Farmer Fred crop-duster who's going to fly your PJ into a mountain. Did I get that right?
Click to expand...

RJ is way off in the weeds as usual. What is the argument? If uber/lyft had to comply with [regulations] then taxis would be more competitive....?

or like, fewer people would get killed/raped... even though background checks are less consistent than with ridesharers and most municipalities don't even track taxi-specific incidents, so how would we know? (vs. the sensationalized stories re: ridesharing b/c clickbait)

taxis are gross and not even safer
 
you know how I know ridesharing is not a big deal and taxi certification is unnecessarily burdensome? major auto insurance companies have started to remove the livery exclusion from the their policies and simply charge a slightly higher "business" rate for ridesharers.
 
WFcatamount22 said:
I think it boils down to old's hating Uber and yelling at cloud.
Click to expand...

You are an idiot.

If someone wants to provide a service to the public, that person should have to live up to the same standards as all others who provide the same service. Why you (and ITC) can't understand this simple concept is beyond me.
 
I'm no anti-regulatory neoliberal Adam Smith acolyte, but I do believe the consumers have spoken on this one
 
RJKarl said:
You are an idiot.

If someone wants to provide a service to the public, that person should have to live up to the same standards as all others who provide the same service. Why you (and ITC) can't understand this simple concept is beyond me.
Click to expand...

because the standards are arbitrary and barely consistent across the board and exist mainly to monopolize the income rather than do their intended goal of protecting consumers.
 
JuiceCrewAllStar said:
I'm no anti-regulatory neoliberal Adam Smith acolyte, but I do believe the consumers have spoken on this one
Click to expand...

i know, usually I'm very vocal that regulations are important to protect consumers but there are a few instances where it's a fucking cash grab
 
JuiceCrewAllStar said:
I'm no anti-regulatory neoliberal Adam Smith acolyte, but I do believe the consumers have spoken on this one
Click to expand...

So, if the consumers speak and want a product whose production creates pollution at their plants. fuck the environment, because you want that product!

Consumers love vape products. So, we shouldn't worry about the health risks.

Bikers don't want to wear helmets. Consumers have spoken. Why should non-riders demand they wear helmets?

I haven't had a ticket in over 30 years nor an accident in longer. Why should I have to carry car insurance?
 
RJKarl said:
So, if the consumers speak and want a product whose production creates pollution at their plants. fuck the environment, because you want that product!
Click to expand...

Consumers love vape products. So, we shouldn't worry about the health risks.

no one argued against all regulation

Bikers don't want to wear helmets. Consumers have spoken. Why should non-riders demand they wear helmets?

bike helmets aren't required for adults in any state. motorcycle helmet laws are a mish mash across the nation. there is a public health interest in motorcycle helmet laws because it affects all sorts of things down stream, like healthcare costs and liability insurance, not simply "guy smashes his head".

I haven't had a ticket in over 30 years nor an accident in longer. Why should I have to carry car insurance?

you don't have to, most states allow you to appeal to be self-insured.
 
Last edited:
ImTheCaptain said:
because the standards are arbitrary and barely consistent across the board and exist mainly to monopolize the income rather than do their intended goal of protecting consumers.
Click to expand...

Rules on many products and services vary state-by-state or city-by-city. But everyone in those cities or states who provide those goods or services have to play by the same rules.

At no time have I said that there shouldn't be independent service providers or that they should have to buy medallions, but they should have to live up licensing and vetting rules just as eateries have to live up to health codes or electricians have to be licensed and live up to rules.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top