When California Shuts Down Tonight...

UberPotomac

Well-Known Member
I’ll be moving over to the Washington DC forum as my UP “home” during the shutdown.

What else will we talk about in the San Diego forum with no U/L?

Beaches? Wildfires? Weekend trips to Las Vegas? Big breasted long leggy blondes?

Nah.
Why ? We did not do nothing wrong.
Why punish us .
well promise we behave !!!! Jajajaja
 

Jo3030

Well-Known Member
Moderator

Post automatically merged:

 
Last edited:

HPRohit

Well-Known Member
The stupid law duly voted on and put in place by the equally stupid people of the state of commifornia is again subverted by one appointed stupid person who thinks they are supposed to save the voters from their own stupidity....
 

Nats121

Well-Known Member
The stupid law duly voted on and put in place by the equally stupid people of the state of commifornia is again subverted by one appointed stupid person who thinks they are supposed to save the voters from their own stupidity....
If it wasn't for that "stupid law", Uber wouldn't be providing destinations during ping, capping their service fee at 75%, allowing drivers to set their own surge multipliers, offering Trip Premiums, etc.
 

HPRohit

Well-Known Member
If it wasn't for that "stupid law", Uber wouldn't be providing destinations during ping, capping their service fee at 75%, allowing drivers to set their own surge multipliers, offering Trip Premiums, etc.

If a company doesn't pay drivers enough, don't drive for them. If an app doesn't give you the features you want or need to do business, don't use the app. The only reason these companies get away with treating drivers the way they are treating drivers is that people keep driving for these companies.

Lawyers are getting rich, and Uber/Lyft will keep reaping profits until it's time to eject and disappear with the billions. The fact that tax dollars are being dumped down the drain to litigate this mess that politicians allowed in the first place is another display of government incompetence and negligence.

Uber/Lyft should have been regulated from the beginning as cab companies. The idiot tax payers of California and every other jurisdiction will pay for this monstrosity to be folded into the systematically corrupt-too-big-to-fail-leviathan.
 

Nats121

Well-Known Member
If a company doesn't pay drivers enough, don't drive for them. If an app doesn't give you the features you want or need to do business, don't use the app. The only reason these companies get away with treating drivers the way they are treating drivers is that people keep driving for these companies.

Lawyers are getting rich, and Uber/Lyft will keep reaping profits until it's time to eject and disappear with the billions. The fact that tax dollars are being dumped down the drain to litigate this mess that politicians allowed in the first place is another display of government incompetence and negligence.

Uber/Lyft should have been regulated from the beginning as cab companies. The idiot tax payers of California and every other jurisdiction will pay for this monstrosity to be folded into the systematically corrupt-too-big-to-fail-leviathan.
Most of your fellow conservatives were opposed to regulating Uber as a cab company. They touted Uber as "innovative" and the "future" when in reality they were nothing more than a throwback to the bad old days of poorly paid, exploited employees with zero benefits.
 

PioneerXi

Well-Known Member
:::Orders an Uber to the DC Forums:::

::: @Jo3030 shows up and the timer starts:::

Message: “I’ll be right over to your forum in a minute.”

::: @Jo3030 cancels on me and drives off :::

::: $3.75 :::

Serves me right. I should have known Uber/Lyft would buy their way out of a legislative order.

Lesson learned: next time I’m headed to another forum, wait till Uber is shut down.
 

HPRohit

Well-Known Member
Most of your fellow conservatives were opposed to regulating Uber as a cab company. They touted Uber as "innovative" and the "future" when in reality they were nothing more than a throwback to the bad old days of poorly paid, exploited employees with zero benefits.
The true principle of conservatism would be to regulate neither Uber/Lyft nor the cab companies...

The mysterious curtain has been lifted. There is no difference between an "Uber" and a taxi cab except those differences forced upon them respectively by the government. They are both car picking up people, transporting them to other places, operated by humans.

Conservative or liberal, the government shouldn't be playing favorites and regulating one segment while letting the rest go wild and free. That is corruption. It happens throughout the political spectrum. When you give a small group of people power, they will abuse it.

Government should be restricted and small. If a car is legal to be on the streets and a driver is qualified to operate it, the government should let them alone and collect the taxes from the profits. The government should not be getting in between the company and the employee unless it is a constitutionally protected issue, such as discrimination based on the protected classes or race, sex, age, etc...
 

Nats121

Well-Known Member
The true principle of conservatism would be to regulate neither Uber/Lyft nor the cab companies...

The mysterious curtain has been lifted. There is no difference between an "Uber" and a taxi cab except those differences forced upon them respectively by the government. They are both car picking up people, transporting them to other places, operated by humans.

Conservative or liberal, the government shouldn't be playing favorites and regulating one segment while letting the rest go wild and free. That is corruption. It happens throughout the political spectrum. When you give a small group of people power, they will abuse it.

Government should be restricted and small. If a car is legal to be on the streets and a driver is qualified to operate it, the government should let them alone and collect the taxes from the profits. The government should not be getting in between the company and the employee unless it is a constitutionally protected issue, such as discrimination based on the protected classes or race, sex, age, etc...
Ultimately the fault lies with these corrupt and greedy "gig" companies for failing to operate in an ethical manner. Had they done so, there never would have been an AB5.
 

HPRohit

Well-Known Member
Ultimately the fault lies with these corrupt and greedy "gig" companies for failing to operate in an ethical manner. Had they done so, there never would have been an AB5.
Nobody cares about ethics. People care about their pay checks. If your pay check sucked and you kept working for Uber, you are an idiot. The corporate people and the drivers that stick with Uber are no different. We joke about it openly everytime when of these new "ethical" driver friendly companies comes around soliciting for drivers. Nobody switches over, because nobody believes that it will work. Uber and Lyft worked because the profit was worth the risk for all the investors that have subsidized driver pay and corporate largess for 8 years.

What you call greed is the reward for taking immense financial risk. The Saudis and Soft Bank have probably lost money, but Dara, Travis, etc are still making millions and billions.

I'll stand right next to you and hate Uber and Lyft for their bullshit overnight pay cuts, and their dishonesty with regard to driver improvements. When I was making money I felt justly compensated me for my time, effort and risk, I drove for Uber/Lyft a lot. Now I drive for them zero....and their crap has zero effect on my life.

Drivers need to walk away. Getting the government involved in California is a colossal mistake and has lead to nothing but instability and insecurity. AB5 yielded a couple cute features in the app...I still don't hear people raving about making tons of money in California on the regular.
 

UberPotomac

Well-Known Member
Ultimately the fault lies with these corrupt and greedy "gig" companies for failing to operate in an ethical manner. Had they done so, there never would have been an AB5.
That is the story of the new conservatives.
No regulation if I can make money
Many regulations if I can make money .

Like Steve Banon see it , everyone is a MARK.
 

Jo3030

Well-Known Member
Moderator
:::Orders an Uber to the DC Forums:::

::: @Jo3030 shows up and the timer starts:::

Message: “I’ll be right over to your forum in a minute.”

::: @Jo3030 cancels on me and drives off :::

::: $3.75 :::

Serves me right. I should have known Uber/Lyft would buy their way out of a legislative order.

Lesson learned: next time I’m headed to another forum, wait till Uber is shut down.

Not the first time I've been accused of shuffling when I did nothing LOL
 

Nats121

Well-Known Member
Nobody cares about ethics. People care about their pay checks.
Every rotten thing they've done and still do is due to their lack of ethics. When I made that statement I mistakenly assumed I wouldn't need to explain it to you.

What you call greed is the reward for taking immense financial risk. The Saudis and Soft Bank have probably lost money, but Dara, Travis, etc are still making millions and billions.
What I call greed is sticking it to the drivers 24/7 and perpetually looking for even more and better ways to stick it to them.

Financial risk? The drivers have always been the ones taking the vast majority of the financial and all of the safety risk. Travis, his investors, and many Uber employees cashed out for many billions of dollars. As far as the Saudis and Soft Bank is concerned, they chose to invest in a company that treats their drivers like garbage, so whatever losses they may incur, (right now about $1 billion combined) I say tough shit.

When I was making money I felt justly compensated me for my time, effort and risk,
I disagree. The hiding of destinations has enabled Uber and Lyft to keep driver pay rates artificially low, which means money is being left on the table with the vast majority of trips. Drivers lose billions of dollars per year in earnings as a result. In my book that doesn't qualify as being "justly compensated", not by a long shot.

Drivers need to walk away.
Not gonna happen unless pay rates fall further. In January 2016, Detroit established 23 cents per mile as the "walk away" point. In higher income markets the walk away point is probably higher.

Getting the government involved in California is a colossal mistake and has lead to nothing but instability and insecurity.
Something had to be done. These companies have been playing by their own rules for years, and as a result the taxpayers have to step in and pay billions of dollars per year to drivers in public assistance to make up for the shortfall caused by being paid 1970s taxi rates.

AB5 yielded a couple cute features in the app
The showing of destinations during pings, a 25% service fee cap, drivers setting their own multipliers, and Trip Premiums in my humble opinion equate to more than a "couple cute features in the app".

I still don't hear people raving about making tons of money in California on the regular.
The major changes such as destination info didn't get a legit chance to be put into widespread use because of the Covid crisis. Had it not been for Covid, driver earnings would be climbing due to the increase of cherry picking by drivers. In the six week period before Covid, cherry picking was already starting to become enough of a problem for Uber that they introduced Trip Premiums.

Personally I don't want to be an employee. I believe the changes made by Uber as well as additional changes such as the setting pay rates at 75-80% of taxi rates and the elimination of Uber's kangaroo court is a better option than employee status. Doing nothing wasn't an option.
 
Last edited:

Uberest

Well-Known Member
Ultimately the fault lies with these corrupt and greedy "gig" companies for failing to operate in an ethical manner. Had they done so, there never would have been an AB5.

this I do not ageee with, respectfully. The anti gig worker effort is being driven primarily by politics:

1- politicians can show they “care”, forcing big business to fork over benefits to workers

2 - feeds the narrative of combatting the exploitation of supposedly dessperate workers

3 - unions will get more dues paying members so politicians will get more “contributions”

4 - it’s a power play too. Politicians don’t like that there could exist freedom to work as a contractor on occasion and fear erosion of traditional employee/employer model

I agree with Uber’s view and survey results. That 75% or so of drivers value the flexibility and do not need or want benefits. I am one of these drivers.

Uber should offer an option to be an employee, where earnings are fixed and the car is paid for as well as gas. Like a taxi.

I feel Uber should leave California if it’s biz model becomes unsustainable due to regulatory over- reach. Government thinks it can milk these businesses and it’s wrong. What they should do is allow them to thrive, and allow any kind of driver engagement. But they won’t, because thriving isn’t the policy goals.... it’s about control and more money for government rather than more money for people.

end soapbox.
 

Another Uber Driver

Well-Known Member
Moderator
Uber should offer an option to be an employee, where earnings are fixed and the car is paid for as well as gas. Like a taxi.
(emphasis added)


The cab business in this area does not work currently on the model described by the emphasised words and has not for years. The cab drivers in this area are independent contractors who own or lease their vehicles and affiliate with the cab companies by contract. Uber has been putting about this cant since before its launch that its "independent contractor" model is something "new". Those who drink or even get close enough to smell the Uber Kool-Aid in the air quickly buy into this falsehood. I own my cab, now and have for years. I have, in the past, rented. Owner or rented, never have I been an "employee" of a cab company when I drove. I was an employee when I worked in the office. When I worked in the office, I received a pay check, had taxes taken out of it and received a W-2 at the end of the year. NEVER did that happen for my driving.

As an owner, I pay ALL expenses related to the cab. As a renter, you pay for gasolene, only. All other expenses are the responsibility of the owner. He is supposed to calculate the rent to cover the expenses and render unto him a profit. Uber/Lyft has, and continue to, put about cant regarding the cab business. A euphemism for this is "cant","urban myth"; the reality is lies. WHAT? Uber lie?.....................puh-LEEZE!


regulatory over- reach.

Most sane people do not want the government involved. The problem is that Uber and Lyft refuse to listen to their drivers and refuse to face the reality that capitalism for the company and socialism for the drivers is an unsustainable business model. The TNCs can not continue to expect the drivers to subsidise both TNC and customer by accepting these artificially low rates. In a capitalist economy, the customer pays the cost of doing business, An additional amount is added to the cost of doing business in order to render unto the provider a profit. Instead of getting the money that they need from the customers, the TNCs continue to get it from the drivers. This is not sustainable.

As the TNCs refuse to listen to the drivers, it becomes necessary to find a voice to whom the TNCs WILL listen The investors? The investors will not want to see the drivers receive a decent return because that cuts into the company revenue which will cut into any recompense that they expect to receive at some point. The other choices are extra-legal means or the government. Most drivers are unwilling to resort to extra-legal means. This leaves the government.

The unions resorted to extra-legal means. The government would not help them against their tyrannical employers who employed thugs to break them. The Mob provided the unions with thugs to counter the companies' thugs. We see what getting into bed with The Mob bought the unions.

If Uber and Lyft had listened to the drivers and gone about business as it is supposed to be done in a capitalist economic system, it would nt be having the problems that it is. If you keep trying to keep people down, they are going to keep trying to find a way to get your heel off of them. If the government is the only way to get Uber/Lyft's Iron Heel off of you, you are going to take it.

"We will grind you ................down under our heel, and we shall walk upon your faces. The world is ours, we are its lords, and ours it shall remain. As for the host of labor, it has been in the dirt since history began, and I read history aright. And in the dirt it shall remain so long as I and mine and those that come after us have the power. There is the word. It is the king of words—Power. Not God, not Mammon, but Power. Pour it over your tongue till it tingles with it. Power.”
― Jack London, The Iron Heel




“Then the business game is to make profits out of others, and to prevent others from making profits out of you.”
---Jack London, op. cit


Woe to the Iron Heel! Soon shall it be thrust back from off prostrate humanity

--Jack London, op. cit.[/b]

Those words are over one hundred years old.


 

nutzareus

Well-Known Member
Yes, this. Gryft and FUber have been @@@@@@@@ to drivers since inception, stealing money from drivers. About time the government stepped on their necks. I’m not a fan of government regulations but they are last resort option to help the voiceless drivers:
 

Uberest

Well-Known Member
I may get flamed but I think drivers today, under Dara, have more input than they did under Travis. I’m not saying it’s where we would all like it to be ... just saying it’s better.
 
Top