• UberPeople.NET - Independent community of rideshare drivers. It's FREE to be a person and enjoy all the benefits of membership. JOIN US! CLICK HERE

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

If this gets passed in Connecticut do you think they will roll it out Nationwide?


  • Total voters
    110

UberBastid

Well-Known Member
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

Well-Known Member
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 :rolleyes: 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.
 
Last edited:

SurgeMasterMN

Well-Known Member
  • Thread Starter Thread Starter
  • #6
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.
312742
 

beebob

Active Member
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.
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

Well-Known Member
  • Thread Starter Thread Starter
  • #8
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👈
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.
 
Last edited:

UberBastid

Well-Known Member
Well here's hoping you make it to adulthood one day :rolleyes: 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

Well-Known Member
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👈
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.
Post automatically merged:

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.
 
Last edited:

UberBastid

Well-Known Member
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

Well-Known Member
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

Well-Known Member
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.
Free to have a gun put against my head isn’t really “freedom” though.
 

No Prisoners

Well-Known Member
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

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

Carbuncle

Well-Known Member
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!
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.
 

beebob

Active Member
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.
Post automatically merged:



Any system that denies negotiations to any involved party is not free, it’s feudalism.
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
 
Last edited:

UberBastid

Well-Known Member
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?

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

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