Uber and Lyft to leave Austin after vote

Discussion in 'Politics, Religion, Social Issues' started by SHNXX, May 8, 2016.

  1. SHNXX macrumors 68000

    Joined:
    Oct 2, 2013
    #1
    http://www.engadget.com/2016/05/08/uber-and-lyft-austin-shutdown/

    Apparently the voters decided that they didn't want Uber picking up or dropping passengers from the street (instead they'd have to do this at a parking lot) and wanted stricter background checks on the drivers, including fingerprinting.

    What do you guys think?
    I think the real losers here are the passengers in Austin, who are now SOL when it comes to ride-hailing options.
     
  2. MadeTheSwitch macrumors 6502a

    MadeTheSwitch

    Joined:
    Apr 20, 2009
    #2
    Wow. This really surprises me since Austin is pretty progressive. I can't imagine sxsw fans being too happy about this.
     
  3. Eraserhead macrumors G4

    Eraserhead

    Joined:
    Nov 3, 2005
    Location:
    UK
    #3
    Uber isn't progressive.
     
  4. SHNXX thread starter macrumors 68000

    Joined:
    Oct 2, 2013
    #4
    I guess the progressive/left position is usually to increase government regulation, so I don't think that's surprising.
    The position of libertarian/businesses is usually to fight such regulation, so Uber and Lyft fighting regulations (some of them were unreasonable, such as forcing Uber to pick up from parking lots, not street) not surprising either.

    But I did find it a little worrisome that Uber and Lyft are fighting to provide less background check, if the law dictates them to do so. Government plays an important role in public safety, so I think it is reasonable to require such things.

    However, in the end, Uber and Lyft are probably (I don't have the data) much safer than traditional cabs due to real-time tracking of location and interactions between driver and passenger and they lower the cost of transportation for consumers so the voters are the ones who are going to lose, ultimately.
     
  5. Eraserhead macrumors G4

    Eraserhead

    Joined:
    Nov 3, 2005
    Location:
    UK
    #5
    ^^ I basically agree. I'm not sure Uber is safer but I agree on the legislation.

    However I think local people have the right to make their own rules insofar as they don't affect outsiders too much. And as tourists/businesspeople usually stay in hotels they'd be unlikely to be affected by this legislation so it's up to the locals to decide.
     
  6. Herdfan macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Apr 11, 2011
    #6
    I have had Uber pick me up on the street outside my hotel many times.

    If taxis can pick up on the street, then Uber should be allowed to also.
     
  7. thermodynamic Suspended

    thermodynamic

    Joined:
    May 3, 2009
    Location:
    USA
    #7
    "Progressive" as in human rights or a deregulated economy? Either way, one can't have a society without an economy, or vice-versa...
     
  8. aaronvan Suspended

    aaronvan

    Joined:
    Dec 21, 2011
    Location:
    República Cascadia
    #8
    No one who has used Uber or Lyft would ever willingly go back to relying on their particular cities corrupt taxi cartel. Leftists claim the progressive label but betray themselves when forced to choose between a modern 21st Century business model or 1930s business model.
     
  9. steve knight macrumors 68020

    steve knight

    Joined:
    Jan 28, 2009
    #9
    The evil leftists stike again. Those shadow people no one ever identifies. So you have proof or did you pull this out the back of your pants?
     
  10. aaronvan Suspended

    aaronvan

    Joined:
    Dec 21, 2011
    Location:
    República Cascadia
    #10
  11. Praxis91 macrumors regular

    Praxis91

    Joined:
    Mar 15, 2011
    #11
    Liberals at it again. At least Texas keeps most of the liberals in Austin.
     
  12. steve knight macrumors 68020

    steve knight

    Joined:
    Jan 28, 2009
    #12
    Well lets go to a righty site and find the info we want imagine that.
    well we do know the right loves unregulated worked great in the past worked great for exxon worked great for the coal companies worked great for pipeline companies. well there were regulations but money took care of them. texas loves unregulation loves to build something that will explode right next to a school then not require insurance to cover the damage. lets unregulated food too thats a great idea.

    see it can go both ways.
    and then all lefties share the same brain unlike righties that share the same rear end.
     
  13. unlinked macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Jul 12, 2010
    Location:
    Ireland
    #13
    Pretty much every story I have read about Uber makes me feel it is run by terrible people.
    --- Post Merged, May 8, 2016 ---
    That is pretty terrible logic. It is like saying bars can sell alcohol to the public so everyone should be allowed to.
     
  14. steve knight macrumors 68020

    steve knight

    Joined:
    Jan 28, 2009
    #14
    texas where you can build a plant that blows up right next to a school and not require fire safety either.
     
  15. Melab macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Aug 9, 2011
    #15
    This is funny since it looks like you are supporting a liberal.
     
  16. aaronvan Suspended

    aaronvan

    Joined:
    Dec 21, 2011
    Location:
    República Cascadia
    #16
    No, it's like saying a bar owned by Bill and a tavern owned by Nancy should both be permitted to sell alcohol to the same people.
    --- Post Merged, May 8, 2016 ---
    I knew you'd attack the source which is why I included a link from The Nation.
     
  17. Praxis91 macrumors regular

    Praxis91

    Joined:
    Mar 15, 2011
    #17
    I like to think of myself more as anti-Hillary. I'm third party, but this election is too important.
     
  18. Populism macrumors regular

    Populism

    Joined:
    Jun 11, 2014
    #18
    Ah. The ol' exploding plant.

    Should be illegal, at least in my opinion.
     
  19. tgara macrumors 6502a

    tgara

    Joined:
    Jul 17, 2012
    Location:
    Somewhere in the Delta Quadrant
    #19
    Exactly right. My guess is that the Austin legislation was likely supported by the local taxi industry to act as a barrier for innovative competitors like Uber and Lyft. It's just a matter of time that the city change its ways. The public will eventually demand it.

    I use Uber exclusively when I travel. It's so easy to call an Uber, you don't need cash, the rides arrive nearly instantaneously, and the cars are comfortable. I was in DC a few weeks ago, and my wife and I had dinner reservations with friends at a fancy restaurant in Georgetown. To get there we called an Uber to our hotel. The car was a late model GMC Yukon SUV and the Uber driver was a school bus driver working to make a few extra bucks to take her kids to Disney world this summer. She negotiated the narrow Georgetown streets like a pro (which she was). I'll never use a regular taxi again.
     
  20. steve knight macrumors 68020

    steve knight

    Joined:
    Jan 28, 2009
    #20
    next time you go to a restaurant feel free to tell the workers they don't need to wash their hands after taking a crap get rid of those silly regulations. we don't need no stinking regulations. and lumping everyone together is a lame argument.
     
  21. unlinked macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Jul 12, 2010
    Location:
    Ireland
    #21
    Apparently Uber and Lyft spent $8 million trying to pass this and they lost so I don't imagine things are going to change for a few years at least.
     
  22. Populism macrumors regular

    Populism

    Joined:
    Jun 11, 2014
    #22
    Yes! Exactly!

    Thank you, steve knight, for saying what everyone else is scared to say!!!
     
  23. steve knight macrumors 68020

    steve knight

    Joined:
    Jan 28, 2009
    #23
  24. steve knight macrumors 68020

    steve knight

    Joined:
    Jan 28, 2009
    #24
    Thanks for agreeing with me your helpful
     
  25. Renzatic Suspended

    Renzatic

    Joined:
    Aug 3, 2011
    Location:
    Gramps, what the hell am I paying you for?
    #25
    The only problem I have with Uber and Lyft is that, from what I gather, they're almost entirely shielded from any and all liability. These companies don't vet their employees or have any practicing standards. Anyone can sign on a driver, from Mike the Upstanding Citizen who wants to make a few extra bucks on the side, to Billy the Serial Murderer/Rapist, who wants an easier way to bait his victims.

    If Billy ends up killing 5 or 6 people, Uber and Lyft can't be held responsible for his actions, since it's an entirely hands-off volunteer cloud sourced service. All liability is held on the not-quite-employee, while the host companies themselves are shielded from any accountability.
     

Share This Page