I'm thinking she's a corporatist, who wants to increase regulation to stifle innovation. She's just not into the newer way of thinking - kind of a Luddite.
Why Is Hillary Attacking Uber?
- Thread starter dandh
- Start date
I did not hear what she said about Uber. I will never-the-less post some random comments ... loosely related random comment:
Why anyone is in a panic over whatever potential threat it presents eludes me.
My guess is that the Liberals see a looming tax collection problem. Uber drivers pay their own expenses and make their own tax payments (including FICA). If you run the potential income numbers for driving, you can see that a driver might come up short come tax payment time ... although technically, they would probably owe very little.
One other issue relates to minimum wages. My hunch is that there is no way to stop these drivers from working for less than the legal minimum wage.
The entire "Gig economy" (housecleaning, ride sharing, room rental, Task-rabbit, and so on) is creating a class of lightly capitalized entrepreneurs. The IRS has been on a mission to stamp out independent contracting for at least 20 years. From their perspective, they see Uber and other gig businesses as compounding their difficulty in these efforts. ... and Hillary likes the IRS.
Additionally, each of these "new" industries is being attacked by governments the world over, so in a sense she is simply staying true to her roots.
..............................
Let Uber do its thing, let it flame out, and we can read about it one day in the history books, along with Solyndra and Elon Musk's adventures as modern day tulip bulb adventures.
We do not need any kind of government program to stamp it out. It will implode (or at least fizzle) on its own. Hillary most certainly understands this, so her angle is clearly political.
.............................
Using a cell phone application to order a taxi might be an innovation. Hopping in some random guys personal car for a fee is not ... and valuing a company built on a zillion guys earning $1-2 a ride after expenses is madness.
Uber may be the most over-valued company on the planet. (Along with the afore-mentioned Tesla I suppose.)
Why anyone is in a panic over whatever potential threat it presents eludes me.
My guess is that the Liberals see a looming tax collection problem. Uber drivers pay their own expenses and make their own tax payments (including FICA). If you run the potential income numbers for driving, you can see that a driver might come up short come tax payment time ... although technically, they would probably owe very little.
One other issue relates to minimum wages. My hunch is that there is no way to stop these drivers from working for less than the legal minimum wage.
The entire "Gig economy" (housecleaning, ride sharing, room rental, Task-rabbit, and so on) is creating a class of lightly capitalized entrepreneurs. The IRS has been on a mission to stamp out independent contracting for at least 20 years. From their perspective, they see Uber and other gig businesses as compounding their difficulty in these efforts. ... and Hillary likes the IRS.
Additionally, each of these "new" industries is being attacked by governments the world over, so in a sense she is simply staying true to her roots.
..............................
Let Uber do its thing, let it flame out, and we can read about it one day in the history books, along with Solyndra and Elon Musk's adventures as modern day tulip bulb adventures.
We do not need any kind of government program to stamp it out. It will implode (or at least fizzle) on its own. Hillary most certainly understands this, so her angle is clearly political.
.............................
Using a cell phone application to order a taxi might be an innovation. Hopping in some random guys personal car for a fee is not ... and valuing a company built on a zillion guys earning $1-2 a ride after expenses is madness.
Uber may be the most over-valued company on the planet. (Along with the afore-mentioned Tesla I suppose.)
What is the newer way of thinking? That, because it is on an "app" it shouldn't follow the long history of legislation/laws/regulation?
And before you "partisan-hack", I have no interest in Hilary, nor her opinions on anything. Just found your OP curious.
Of course you don't like Hillary, you just like her ideas, goals and platform.
I'm at a loss here, which idiot poster are you so that I know who I'm dealing with?
Oh, so you're the one obsessed with Star.It's my nature to obsess over brown stars.
This whole thing had me really confused.
Thanks for clearing that up for me.
I'll take care of that dirty star for you.Oh, so you're the one obsessed with Star.
This whole thing had me really confused.
Thanks for clearing that up for me.
Apparently it was. You'll be reading and replying to everything I say. Because . . .
You can't own somebody with 35 posts.
I don't know if they are the same people, but starbrown, hriscool, and thomas mulligan are tied together. When HRiscool comes around, the other two are sure to follow. I don't think they are the same posters, but they likely went to high school together and maybe do some mutual masterbation sessions while watching Fox News. Or something like that. I just checked their profiles and they all have similar gaps in posting which I doubt is a coincidence.
starbrown had a gap from June 23 to today.
HR had a gap from June 23 to Saturday.
Thomas had a gap from June 23 to yesterday.
Star and HR especially seem to have an inflated view of their posts. You can assume the response to this post will either be a cyclown reference or an accusation that I am another poster.
I guess we will see. My perspective is colored by what I see in the Las Vegas market where there was a bit of a court battle ... with Uber gaining a foothold eventually.
This is a unique market where the prices (regulated of course, similar to a public utility) are artificially low because of heavy advertising expenditures on the part of the casino industry. The average taxi fare is around $15 meaning that the Uber driver's cut would be ten bucks or so. Maintenance, insurance, depreciation expense, taxes including FICA, traffic citations, etc. probably would take the lion's share of that.
Leaving the drivers with primarily tip income ...
However, my understanding is that Uber customers are actually encouraged to not leave tips ... and that Uber does not provide for advertising income ... wrapped cars, etc. I suppose that a driver could go out and solicit his own advertising, but that would be quite time consuming and would further destroy the value of your private car.
Unless Uber is able to raise prices a lot, those guys are not going to be making any money.
Uber will still keep their 30% so it might make sense for them, but what they are building is still based on having a zillion drivers out there working 80-100 hours a week for anywhere between $4 and $8 an hour ... and maybe even less since there seems to be a good amount of ebb and flow in that business.
The lIberals will find this to be an affront and will be coming after them. (There is already a special 3% excise tax on Uber rides in Nevada ... so it is happening fast.)
That is not a $40 billion company.
Good for them, but anyone investing in that company is betting that they can develop an act II such as the driverless delivery cars that they have already started talking about.
The Uber drivers I spoke to in Seattle said they were making good money. One was able to buy a new car (newer) with what he was making. he worked whenever he wanted. All he had to do is turn on his phone/app when he wanted to be made available.
Could it be different elsewhere? Sure. The cost for a taxi to the airport was $40. Uber was $30. I don't know what a union taxi cab company pays or what cut they keep but I find it hard to believe that Uber isn't a better deal for a driver.
Could it be different elsewhere? Sure. The cost for a taxi to the airport was $40. Uber was $30. I don't know what a union taxi cab company pays or what cut they keep but I find it hard to believe that Uber isn't a better deal for a driver.
The only real reason for dems to go against Uber is for the unions. It's like the mafia.
Sure, when your company pretends you don't work for them, refuses to insure you, and doesn't follow applicable laws....overhead should be much lower. In fact, $30 is probably a ripoff considering.
They are self employed, 1099 earners. I realize nanny staters can't fathom self reliance but do you really think Uber drivers would take the job if they aren't making any money?
(remember, I've already established that they ARE making good money.)
Also, do you really think Taxi drivers are living the life of luxury? You don't know anything about cabs huh?
How much time from when you requested the taxi until you were dropped off at the airport and how many miles did you cover? How much of a tip did you leave? What type of vehicle did he have? How much luggage did you have? Just curious ...
It should not be too difficult to estimate/approximate his earnings.
............................
Sample:
Based on a 15 mile trip and a total of one hour and fifteen minutes of the driver's time ... assuming a deadhead back to his neighborhood.
Fare X .70 = $21
less car expenses at .75 a mile (30 miles total) = $21.50
plus tip at 20% = $6 + $2 for luggage = $8
Net profit = $6.50 for 1 1/4 hours work = $5.20 and hour.
Last edited:
It appears you "don't know anything about cabs huh". Uber has consistently violated all of the laws/regulations surrounding cabs. ADA, Insurance, Background Checks, etc.
Call them "self-employed" all you want, it doesn't change their actual status. They are making money, even though you really haven't established anything, because they get to ignore the regulation, and charge hyper-inflated rates when it suits them. Sure, they are "independent contractors" when they violate federal law by locking a sight-dog in the truck, sure they are contractors when they hit and run and UBER refuses to pay their coverage, sure they are...when it is convenient.
People are so excited about "apps" these days, thinking that this is amazing new technology that has never been thought of before, that they think they can just ignore the years and years and years of precedent that has been set for safety, legality, other things.
It is just like AirBnB, sure great idea (it isn't new), until you have a "renter" that is now a tenant and AirBnB ain't there to help. Just because something is an "app" doesn't make it new, and it doesn't mean it gets to ignore regulations.
Try this on for size: An app that allows you to hire a "plumber", who is a 1099 independent contractor, who screws up the job, and you find out he isn't licensed/insured/trained for the job. Would that be ok? I'll bet you'd want to sue them.
It is just like AirBnB, sure great idea (it isn't new), until you have a "renter" that is now a tenant and AirBnB ain't there to help. Just because something is an "app" doesn't make it new, and it doesn't mean it gets to ignore regulations.
Try this on for size: An app that allows you to hire a "plumber", who is a 1099 independent contractor, who screws up the job, and you find out he isn't licensed/insured/trained for the job. Would that be ok? I'll bet you'd want to sue them.
Chocolate starfish?It's my nature to obsess over brown stars.
The guy was within 1 block of me when i sent a request. I watched him on my app drive right up to the door.
I was with the guy less than 20-25 minutes total AND, he already had a fare as I was getting out of the cab.
Last edited:
I believe Uber does back ground checks. And, they are required to carry insurance as well. Nice tries here but the union butt hurt is strong.
"hyper inflated rates when it suits them". LOL. It's supply and demand. overall, they are still generally less expensive than cabs.
Why do you hate technology? Is it because you are going to vote for Hillary? You know she hasn't driven in 25+ years and can't even operate an email account on her phone.
That is a horrible comparison.
So you hate Angie's list then? That would be similar to Uber.
Again, they have to provide proof of insurance to be allowed to drive.
I think the car expenses are overstated. In the first place, the IRS mileage rate is 57.5 cents per mile, and that's a pretty accurate estimation for the average car,imo. But, even to use that misses the point. Much of that represents a cost that the person had to pay even if he never gave one Uber ride. Still had to buy the car, make payments, have insurance, etc. as part of his normal life.
It would make more sense to compare the cost of actual operation, such as gas, increased cost of insurance (if any) for extra miles driven, proportionate cost of maintenance and repairs, and the amount those miles would reduce the value of his car when he finally sells it or trades it in. Using that method, the marginal cost for this trip is probably only $6-8, leaving a profit of $13.50-$15.50, and that is the reason why people are signing up all over to be Uber drivers. Plus, the driver can then write the miles off their income when they file taxes, at the approved rate of 57.5 cents per mile.
I do not have much deductible mileage these days ... and I use Turbo Tax for filing, meaning I have to actually go in look at the deduction after the fact.
... so, admittedly I did kind of pull that number out of the air. However, when I look around this town, I do not see Taxis that are in decent condition. Every one of them has dents and scrapes all the way around. They have holes drilled all over so that signs can be displayed and in all cases, they are mechanically beaten up.
Additionally, they are hauling drunks around, smelly homeless people, and quite often I see them going through fast-food drive through restaurants ... and in Nevada, you are allowed to drink in taxis and to smoke in taxis. ... Eating, drinking, and smoking : That is kind of a trifecta of bad activities, not to mention drunks who toss their cookies in the taxi. (This is apparently a situation requiring $200-300 to do a proper hazardous materials clean-up, and I am not sure that I would trust an Uber driver to have done a proper cleanup.)
One other item: Since these are 1099, employees, they are paying their own taxes including the full amount of FICA (15.2%?) meaning that 7.1% of FICA is coming out of their 70% cut. I kind of had that in the back of my mind as a variable expense ... related loosely to miles driven.
Since the IRS is not really known for generosity, were I to become an Uber driver, I would estimate the expected net income from my rides using something North of $.575.
I know people are signing up to drive, but when I hear people describe how much they are making, they seem to always be talking about revenues and not income. I think they are a little starry-eyed ... and being influenced by some outlandish claims. These people all seem new to being self-employed. I wonder what they will be claiming after filing their taxes for their first year.
Please count me as a skeptic.
Uber may ultimately become a successful company, but not in its present iteration. The next phase will count for a lot.
Last edited:
Yes, it is "supply and demand" that local governance have dealt with over time. Uber thinks they can ignore it. Sure, maybe it should be a more "open market", but since when does making it an "app" allow it to simply violate local regs?
Funny on the background checks and insurance part, both things they specifically fought the City of Des Moines over. They did their own "background checks", but refused to actually disclose to officials what they were, what was found, and what was actually done. You know, something you do when you haven't actually done background checks.
"Apps" are not any different technology than a phone. You could always call for a cab, and you could get estimated pricing. They didn't reinvent the wheel. They created an "app", la di da.
As I said, they SHOULD be less expensive...they ignore the regulations that raise prices. BUT, when you get in to an accident that, you know, deforms you for the rest of your life, enjoy trying to recoup on the $25,000 minimum insurance their "non-employee" is likely carrying.
Well, first, yes, Angie's list is a known fraud, allowing company's to pay Angie to give them better ratings. You know, illegal things.
And that WOULDN'T be similar to Uber, because Angie isn't paying those providers. You pay Angie for the reviews, like consumerreports, and then you contract with the driver. Please tell me you think people paying over the Uber app, of which money goes straight to Uber, believe they are contracting with the driver himself.
Yes, minimum single driver insurance. $25,000 will go a long ways towards covering that fatal accident killing 3 passengers. As I said above, they fought Des Moines on this, they did not want to require, or provide more insurance.
You still make many, many assumptions.
All these regulations you say they are violating and ignoring?
Background checks? You really want to start comparing cab drivers back grounds and quality to Uber? (Have you taken a Uber ride or rode in a taxi before?
You realize they have minimum insurance requirements? Cab companies are required to carry insurance as well.
So you don't know how cabs and Uber work, nor do you understand insurance.
You simply sound like a pro union whiner.
So you call yours "the air" eh?
JK, of course, but I still think we're talking past each other.The Uber driver would have to pay 15.3% FICA, but only on profit after all expense. So, he gets to deduct 57. 5 cents for each mile driven before he pays FICA, in addition to other expenses needed to run his business.
I think the place we're parting ways is in the ownership of the car, which is a primary component of the mileage rate set by the IRS. They figure an average car, not based on your model or brand, and calculate the entire amount of depreciation into that number. However, the Uber driver who already owns that car for personal reasons would suffer that depreciation regardless, but now he gets to write it off.
I think it must make economic sense if so many people are willing to do it - it's a market-based decision, and lots of people are signing up. We'll see who's right, and I guess until then just agree to disagree on this.
Similar threads
