|
edit dumb and wrong again..confused wilmington with winchester.
the worst thing is fucked around with this message at 15:45 on Jun 18, 2015 |
#
?
Jun 18, 2015 15:43
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 3, 2024 12:12 |
|
|
Main Paineframe posted:Flooding the supply side of the market is a crucial part of Uber's business model. That's how they provide decent service despite not controlling how many drivers are on the road at any given time or where they are - they just brute-force the logistics by making sure there's such a massive oversupply of drivers that there's always tons of them sitting around desperate for rides, no matter when and where, and tons more who aren't currently logged in but can be coaxed into signing in for a few fares if the system is beginning to feel the strain. Also, turnover is pretty high - I think only half of Uber drivers are still with Uber after a year? One of my housemates drives for Uber and Lyft both, apparently that's pretty common (Los Angeles). Uber has a much larger market share but apparently Lyft has better reward/incentive stuff for their drives. For example he mentioned if he drives 10 high-demand hours or 50 total in a week, Lyft doesn't take their 20% cut or something. Anyway a lot of drivers out here will have both apps and switch between them during the course of a day depending on how many fares they're getting. He says he puts about 700 miles per week on his car I can ask some specific questions. Uber and similar services are amazing for riders, sounds like drivers largely get a poo poo sandwich and shoulder most of the liability and risk.
|
|
#
?
Jun 18, 2015 16:02
|
|
|
Main Paineframe posted:The number of taxi drivers on the streets does need to be limited, because taxis -especially ones without passengers - have a nasty negative impact on traffic flows, especially in the already high-traffic areas where they tend to loiter and cruise around. If you let taxi companies put as many cars as they want on the road, it immensely worsens traffic, particularly in the worst-traffic areas. Taxi medallions are intended to create scarcity, but for the sake of preventing the traffic flow from being overwhelmed by taxis. Of course, people who do pass that scarcity barrier have a vested interest in preventing anyone else from ever passing the same barrier, but that's unavoidable with any sort of enforced scarcity. Kings Of Calabria posted:The difference I see there is that if enough people had showed up to local or state held meetings,or leaned on MassDOT (or whoever is it), or mailed their Senators, maybe some of those taxi problems would be fixed. I'm not saying it would be easy but at least I would have the option and my neighbors who might agree or disagree would have their say too. Rudager posted:loving hell you're dense.
|
|
#
?
Jun 18, 2015 18:25
|
|
|
Pellisworth posted:Anyway a lot of drivers out here will have both apps and switch between them during the course of a day depending on how many fares they're getting.
|
|
#
?
Jun 18, 2015 23:04
|
|
|
For a driver, keep this is mind: the federal government reimburses 55 cents per mile driven for work. This is calculated to cover gas, wear and tear on the vehicle, depreciation, pretty much every hidden expense. So depending on the speed you're going, it's anywhere from 15 to 40 bucks per hour. So unless you're clearing, say, 20 an hour, you probably aren't making money. This doesn't include any expenses you might face from an uninsured accident.
|
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2015 21:12
|
|
|
Rudager posted:McDonalds advertises their $1 cheeseburger meal deal on TV/Radio, not the franchise opportunities. Maybe it's cause they realize that people who listen to radio are usually in a car at the time. A car they can drive, thus making them potential drivers. Their website is for riders. I'm not being sarcastic, this is just something I'm positing from what I read thus far.
|
|
#
?
Jul 9, 2015 18:27
|
|
|
Eskaton posted:Except in this case the labor is being replaced by computers and not toiling laborers. Those poor drivers are out of a job I guess? Is it really though? I think it might be more like "the toiling laborers have been moved to somewhere, in another nation, where we cannot see them". And its like, the human suffering stays the same and justs gets poured into fewer people. So instead of 100,000 disgruntled cab drivers, you get 1000 slaves mining wolfram with rusty picks and a gun pointed at them all day. Tautologicus posted:Highway driving, sure, great. That's easy stuff. What about the rest of day to day life? Still a tremendous improvement over public infrastructure. A world where the bus always has roughly as many seats as it needs to, and waits for you. What a superior solution for "Travel from medium size city to Bumfuck, Nowhere for mountain bike riding" compared to driving yourself or the public transport boondoggle. Keldoclock fucked around with this message at 23:53 on Jul 10, 2015 |
|
#
?
Jul 10, 2015 14:20
|
|
|
There is a problem in the current taxi-market, at least where I live. There are a dozen taxi companies, but price and quality information is unavailable when you actually need it - when you need to get from A to B without spending hours comparing prices on the internet. Also, they will all agressively try to cheat anyone, on anything between copying the credit card info to driving a longer route for a bigger fare. So you try to pick a cab based on the brands that cheated you the least lately, but they all kind of do. I guess most customers are willing to pay a premium to avoid the hassles that comes with regular taxis. Or pay less than current prices, of course that is also good. Maybe Uber takes too big a cut, but the market for transportation with better quality control is definitely legitimate. .
|
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2015 02:55
|
|
|
hhhmmm posted:There is a problem in the current taxi-market, at least where I live. There are a dozen taxi companies, but price and quality information is unavailable when you actually need it - when you need to get from A to B without spending hours comparing prices on the internet. Also, they will all agressively try to cheat anyone, on anything between copying the credit card info to driving a longer route for a bigger fare. So you try to pick a cab based on the brands that cheated you the least lately, but they all kind of do. The point that's being made here (by you, even!) is nobody's actually willing to pay for that quality control.
|
|
#
?
Jul 13, 2015 13:54
|
|
|
ruby idiot railed posted:The point that's being made here (by you, even!) is nobody's actually willing to pay for that quality control. Uhm, no. Absolutely not. The point is that the regular taxi market place is setup so that the consumer can't reliably tell the quality nor the price of the service at the time of purchase. It is not actually possible for me to get better taxi service by paying more. I can't tell which of the taxi drivers are going to pick a longer route on purpose just to inflate the fare if there are several taxis at a stop. However, with Uber you do get to know the driver's rating beforehand indicating the quality of service you can expect. Also, I believe, a fixed price quote? Thus Uber provides additional value in more honest communication with the customer.
|
|
#
?
Jul 15, 2015 22:22
|
|
|
hhhmmm posted:Uhm, no. Absolutely not. And you get an email with a GPS map of your route afterwards, so if a driver got lost or took a longer route, you can email and complain. This has happened to me twice, and both times I've received a partial refund.
|
|
#
?
Jul 15, 2015 22:37
|
|
|
My dad does it almost full time. Hes also in a major city in Australia, so that probably helps the OP more than anyone else in this thread so far. Hes 63, left his blue collar job and now does Uber. Starts around 7 in the morning and heads towards the airport, breaks in the middle of the day for a few hours, then does the afternoon peak period. Friday nights and weekend nights he will hang out a bit here and there in the city if the surge rates are on. Hes happier, enjoys driving for Uber, tells me about all the smoking hot chicks he drives around, and generally hasnt had any complaints about it beyond a few customers being a bit weird (but to my dad anyone slightly left of centre is weird). He also drives wedding cars on the weekend, again, mostly for pleasure, but the money doesnt hurt. Hes not financially in need of Uber, but keeps him occupied, puts some money in his pocket, and he cleared it all with his accountant who said it was a decent idea. The only real issue he had was that his 2005 Subaru Legacy sedan was deemed to old, so he had to get a new car. With some new tax breaks for small businesses in Australia, he could deduct 100% of the cost of any purchase under $20K - so he bought a brand new Kia for $19,990, claimed it against his previous income from his old job, therefore reducing his taxable income by 20k and having a full warranty on the vehicle. Hes registered as a business, has commercial car insurance, and has his limo driver licensing or whatever it is. hes not witty enough to do anything thats not above board, and hasnt got any major complaints. really, the only thing that sucks is that he never shuts the gently caress up about Uber, or asking me if I have heard anything about Uber on the internet, because he doesnt know how to use the internet to find out for himself. including running costs it works out to about $17 an hour in your pocket which for a guy sitting on some fat-as-gently caress super annuation and a big-rear end expensive house, isnt really that bad. He doesnt have the physical wear and tear that his old job had (which was a lot, being in the petro-chemical industry) or any of the workplace poo poo he was dealing with towards the end of his career, he gets to be social and meet people (which IMO is great as he has few friends and rarely gets out) and its exposing him to smart phones and technology and his learning that slowly. Im fully aware of the risks and the lovely pay and all of that, and I have told him my opinion of it, but honestly it has more Pros than just money for him, so I dont push it. hes happier than he was in his old job.
|
|
#
?
Jul 16, 2015 07:25
|
|
|
So your dad makes minimum wage? cool
|
|
#
?
Jul 16, 2015 07:51
|
|
|
so you totally didnt get that he can afford to earn minimum wage due to having plenty of money already, and it was a better work/lifestyle balance for him? cool.
|
|
#
?
Jul 16, 2015 09:16
|
|
|
lol I'm happy that your dad sees no issues with being exploited by a major corporate behemoth. Capitalism internalized at its peak.
|
|
#
?
Jul 16, 2015 13:46
|
|
|
anyway, every time someone proudly boasts about paying as little taxes as possible/ scamming taxes, one should really stop listening. It was my fault for reading that whole depressing posts.
|
|
#
?
Jul 16, 2015 13:48
|
|
|
man enjoys job, is unwittingly slave labour through marxist false consciousness, more at 11
|
|
#
?
Jul 16, 2015 14:02
|
|
|
hhhmmm posted:There is a problem in the current taxi-market, at least where I live. There are a dozen taxi companies, but price and quality information is unavailable when you actually need it - when you need to get from A to B without spending hours comparing prices on the internet. Also, they will all agressively try to cheat anyone, on anything between copying the credit card info to driving a longer route for a bigger fare. So you try to pick a cab based on the brands that cheated you the least lately, but they all kind of do. You know that stuff is illegal, right? Have you ever tried reporting the taxi companies that attempt to cheat you to the local taxi commission or whatever? All these rules and regulations (that Uber ignores) are intended to make it easy for municipalities to hold taxi companies responsible for violations, though it relies on people actually reporting violations instead of throwing up their hands and saying "welp, cheated again! that's just how taxis are, no point doing anything about it because surely the only reason they're bad is because evil Big Taxi sabotaged the free market!". Laserface posted:so you totally didnt get that he can afford to earn minimum wage due to having plenty of money already, and it was a better work/lifestyle balance for him? cool. Sounds like your dad doesn't actually need to work at all anymore, but instead of kicking back and enjoying his retirement, he spent twenty grand upfront so that he would be able to work a minimum wage job because he can't think of anything better to do with his huge pile of money. I've known a couple of old people who worked retail and really enjoyed it, but that's not because retail was such a great job or anything - it was because without a people-facing job to get them out of the house and force people to talk to them, they'd just sit around miserable and lonely all day.
|
|
#
?
Jul 16, 2015 16:12
|
|
|
Laserface posted:so you totally didnt get that he can afford to earn minimum wage due to having plenty of money already, and it was a better work/lifestyle balance for him? cool. I'm glad your dad is doing something he enjoys and earning some scratch for it.
|
|
#
?
Jul 16, 2015 17:24
|
|
|
Laserface posted:so you totally didnt get that he can afford to earn minimum wage due to having plenty of money already, and it was a better work/lifestyle balance for him? cool. It's going to take him a long time of working to equal the amount he paid for the car, though. It's cool that he gets to get out and meet people and stuff, and if he needs to pair it with a job that's okay for him, but it still means uber gets to profit off of him which I think is what mostly bugs people. I have relatives who aren't happy unless they're working too, but mostly they do volunteer stuff so I guess they make out even worse financially but on the other hand nobody is profiting off of them.
|
|
#
?
Jul 16, 2015 18:09
|
|
|
Obdicut posted:It's going to take him a long time of working to equal the amount he paid for the car, though. It's cool that he gets to get out and meet people and stuff, and if he needs to pair it with a job that's okay for him, but it still means uber gets to profit off of him which I think is what mostly bugs people. Unless I'm reading that post wrong, he got the car effectively for free because of Australian tax breaks for small business. So in a way, he got a free car literally because driving for Uber counts as running a small business and he got the tax deducted from his previous earnings, because clearly he might not be making 20k worth of taxable income as an Uber driver. Sure Uber profits off him, but then again the level of effort involved in setting yourself up as an independent driver or just signing up for a service that simply drives all the business to your door is world's apart. It's like any other franchise, in principle.
|
|
#
?
Jul 16, 2015 19:07
|
|
|
Jeza posted:Unless I'm reading that post wrong, he got the car effectively for free because of Australian tax breaks for small business. So in a way, he got a free car literally because driving for Uber counts as running a small business and he got the tax deducted from his previous earnings, because clearly he might not be making 20k worth of taxable income as an Uber driver. Tax deductions != cash rebate
|
|
#
?
Jul 16, 2015 19:10
|
|
|
Jeza posted:Unless I'm reading that post wrong, he got the car effectively for free because of Australian tax breaks for small business. Yeah, you are. Not having to pay tax on 20K of income doesn't net you 20K, it nets you whatever tax you'd have to pay on that income. So, if he'd have to pay 25% on it, he'd have paid 15K for the car. Unless he typed it wrong and didn't mean that it reduced his taxable income. quote:Sure Uber profits off him, but then again the level of effort involved in setting yourself up as an independent driver or just signing up for a service that simply drives all the business to your door is world's apart. It's like any other franchise, in principle. Other franchises are incredibly more complex and require hundreds of thousands of dollars, I think you mean being like any other independent contractor. Anyway: There's no problem with his dad, but that this edge case might--might!--make some sort of sense just underscores how little sense being an Uber driver makes for most people. The Taxi medallion system in a lot of cities is hyper-corrupt, but the solution to that isn't just chucking regs out the window. There's a reason beyond profit constraints that we want only X number of cars driving around picking people up; vehicle taxes and gas taxes do not actually pay for the infrastructure cars use. Uber profits not only off of the people who work for it, but also from taxpayers keeping the infrastructure they need going, and they have the gall to whine about being regulated as users of that infrastructure. It's annoying.
|
|
#
?
Jul 16, 2015 19:15
|
|
|
Obdicut posted:The Taxi medallion system in a lot of cities is hyper-corrupt, but the solution to that isn't just chucking regs out the window. I thought the medallion system only affects street hails, which uber doesn't take?
|
|
#
?
Jul 16, 2015 19:56
|
|
|
uninterrupted posted:I thought the medallion system only affects street hails, which uber doesn't take? Nope, dispatch too.
|
|
#
?
Jul 16, 2015 19:58
|
|
|
Obdicut posted:Nope, dispatch too. In general, this is wrong, at least for the United States. Dispatch/black car service do not need medallions to operate.
|
|
#
?
Jul 16, 2015 20:10
|
|
|
ruby idiot railed posted:In general, this is wrong, at least for the United States. Dispatch/black car service do not need medallions to operate. Okay. They need licenses to operate. In addition, medallion cabs also do dispatch.
|
|
#
?
Jul 16, 2015 20:17
|
|
|
Main Paineframe posted:You know that stuff is illegal, right? Have you ever tried reporting the taxi companies that attempt to cheat you to the local taxi commission or whatever? All these rules and regulations (that Uber ignores) are intended to make it easy for municipalities to hold taxi companies responsible for violations, though it relies on people actually reporting violations instead of throwing up their hands and saying "welp, cheated again! that's just how taxis are, no point doing anything about it because surely the only reason they're bad is because evil Big Taxi sabotaged the free market!". Yes, surely, it is my responsibility to ensure that my local taxis are less bad than their internet competition. It is my failure to report* that is the demise of the honest taxi service over Uber. If I only cared enough, the current system would have worked. Chosing a competitor that offers better service is never the solution to a mismanaged monopoly. * I do actually report the worst offenses. gently caress you.
|
|
#
?
Jul 16, 2015 23:08
|
|
|
Main Paineframe posted:Sounds like your dad doesn't actually need to work at all anymore, but instead of kicking back and enjoying his retirement, he spent twenty grand upfront so that he would be able to work a minimum wage job because he can't think of anything better to do with his huge pile of money. I've known a couple of old people who worked retail and really enjoyed it, but that's not because retail was such a great job or anything - it was because without a people-facing job to get them out of the house and force people to talk to them, they'd just sit around miserable and lonely all day. He sold his other vehicles (the previous car and his 'fun' car) both of which were impractical for him now being sporty cars with manual transmissions. he was going to do it anyway, so its not like this was a decision based entirely on Uber. and yeah, before he started doing it he DID just sit around watching TV all day. Obdicut posted:It's going to take him a long time of working to equal the amount he paid for the car, though. It's cool that he gets to get out and meet people and stuff, and if he needs to pair it with a job that's okay for him, but it still means uber gets to profit off of him which I think is what mostly bugs people. Yes, but hes not working to pay for the car. Obdicut posted:Yeah, you are. Not having to pay tax on 20K of income doesn't net you 20K, it nets you whatever tax you'd have to pay on that income. So, if he'd have to pay 25% on it, he'd have paid 15K for the car. Unless he typed it wrong and didn't mean that it reduced his taxable income. This. My dad is an edge case. He enjoys driving (hes worked as a wedding chauffeur for close to 15 years on weekends), is in a financial position where hes not relying on Uber for its income at all, and it aligned well with his retirement plans he already had (sell his cars, buy an econobox for himself to get around in) and reduced his taxable income for the same financial year that he resigned from his job - he had long service and annual leave that accumulated to nearly 12 months of time off, so having that paid out meant he wanted to reduce his taxable income as much as he could. the flexibility of being able to work literally whenever he wants is also helpful to him. mid-20s person driving for uber to make money? bad idea. Old man with nothing better to do who enjoys the work? not as bad of an idea If you can make the numbers work.
|
|
#
?
Jul 17, 2015 01:04
|
|
|
oliwan posted:anyway, every time someone proudly boasts about paying as little taxes as possible/ scamming taxes, one should really stop listening. It was my fault for reading that whole depressing posts. Lol
|
|
#
?
Jul 17, 2015 01:33
|
|
|
oliwan posted:anyway, every time someone proudly boasts about paying as little taxes as possible/ scamming taxes, one should really stop listening. It was my fault for reading that whole depressing posts. Taking advantage of tax credits and ways to lower your taxes as much as possible legally, is simply common sense. Are you some kind of a moron? Laserface: is there a specific reason why your Dad chose Uber instead of working part time for an established car service with its own fleet? I ask, because that's what my buddy's doing right now (well, full time, because he wants the hours) and he's making way more money, and doesn't bear the financial responsibility for fixing the vehicles if they break. He's thinking of becoming an owner-operator, though not with Uber, and I'm curious what other people's experiences have been like.
|
|
#
?
Jul 17, 2015 01:44
|
|
|
Laserface posted:This. My dad is an edge case. He enjoys driving (hes worked as a wedding chauffeur for close to 15 years on weekends), is in a financial position where hes not relying on Uber for its income at all, and it aligned well with his retirement plans he already had (sell his cars, buy an econobox for himself to get around in) and reduced his taxable income for the same financial year that he resigned from his job - he had long service and annual leave that accumulated to nearly 12 months of time off, so having that paid out meant he wanted to reduce his taxable income as much as he could. I'm not tax accountant, but I don't see how his small business getting a tax break reduces his personal income tax obligations?
|
|
#
?
Jul 17, 2015 02:45
|
|
|
PT6A posted:Laserface: is there a specific reason why your Dad chose Uber instead of working part time for an established car service with its own fleet? I ask, because that's what my buddy's doing right now (well, full time, because he wants the hours) and he's making way more money, and doesn't bear the financial responsibility for fixing the vehicles if they break. He's thinking of becoming an owner-operator, though not with Uber, and I'm curious what other people's experiences have been like. I love my dad, but hes a tradesman at heart and doesnt have the wits/smarts for operating his own business. Put him on tools and he knows his poo poo, just not savvy enough for owner-operator style stuff. I suggested that if he enjoys driving so much why not get a job as a limo/transfers guy and drive around in fancy cars with high-profile people but I think the flexibility of Uber is really important to him. My mother works as a casual so if they decide they want to take a few days away to unwind they can do so at the drop of a hat without any real notice. Rudager posted:I'm not tax accountant, but I don't see how his small business getting a tax break reduces his personal income tax obligations? I asked this too, as I am not an accountant, but apparently his accountant says 'they dont care where the tax comes from, as long as they get it' which also apparently means deductions dont matter either.
|
|
#
?
Jul 17, 2015 05:03
|
|
|
quote:
if you're a sole proprietor or one person llc in the us, the irs pretends they don't exist and it's all your money. dunno about oz, but it's probably similar down there.
|
|
#
?
Jul 17, 2015 18:32
|
|
|
this thread is awful and needs to be closed
|
|
#
?
Jul 17, 2015 21:03
|
|
|
This is like listening to someone talk about timeshares. "Look, I know that most timeshares are scammy, but my parents' timeshare was actually a great deal because  "
|
|
#
?
Jul 20, 2015 23:42
|
|
|
Keldoclock posted:Is it really though? I think it might be more like "the toiling laborers have been moved to somewhere, in another nation, where we cannot see them". And its like, the human suffering stays the same and justs gets poured into fewer people. So instead of 100,000 disgruntled cab drivers, you get 1000 slaves mining wolfram with rusty picks and a gun pointed at them all day.
|
|
#
?
Jul 21, 2015 23:20
|
|
|
Obdicut posted:There's a reason beyond profit constraints that we want only X number of cars driving around picking people up; vehicle taxes and gas taxes do not actually pay for the infrastructure cars use. That sounds like a good argument for increasing vehicle and gas taxes. It's an extremely bad argument for restricting the number of taxis while leaving regular cars untouched.
|
|
#
?
Jul 22, 2015 22:27
|
|
|
Jeb Bush 2012 posted:That sounds like a good argument for increasing vehicle and gas taxes. It's an extremely bad argument for restricting the number of taxis while leaving regular cars untouched. First, that's a false dichotomy: regulating taxis doesn't mean you have to leave regular cars untouched. You can charge a congestion fee or something else along those lines. Second, increased taxi availability (and drive-down costs from it) means fewer people take public transport and walk. Lack of taxis doesn't tend to significantly drive private car ownership or usage.
|
|
#
?
Jul 22, 2015 22:38
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 3, 2024 12:12 |
|
|
Obdicut posted:First, that's a false dichotomy: regulating taxis doesn't mean you have to leave regular cars untouched. You can charge a congestion fee or something else along those lines. Second, increased taxi availability (and drive-down costs from it) means fewer people take public transport and walk. Lack of taxis doesn't tend to significantly drive private car ownership or usage.
|
|
#
?
Jul 22, 2015 22:56
|
|