GatewayRedbirds.com

I figured this could use it's own thread instead of being lumped into the political one and some of the others.

Problem: Uber is having trouble finding enough people to drive for them.
Solution: Give poor people a car lease in exchange for driving for them, and take payments out of their Uber earnings. If they don't drive enough to make the payments, repossess the car.

I mean, this just sounds like a terrible idea. They will have like homeless people wanting to drive for them just to get a car for a couple weeks. I wonder if Uber has ever thought about...........paying their drivers more?

Uber is in the sub-prime auto business

So, instead of giving someone a job, albeit on not so good terms maybe, keep them without jobs and on welfare? Got it.

Jason Stapleton railed on this today. http://www.jasonstapleton.com/uber-expl ... g-new-car/

Start listening at 28 min

Do Uber drivers make enough to not need welfare? Asking seriously bc I haven't studied up on the particulars

I used über this past weekend for the first time. Got interested and an article I read said average full time driver made 90k. I find that hard to believe.

I would bet that over 90% of them don't, probably well over. An Uber driver here made $14 driving for 2 hours on a Friday night. Then subtract off gas and he barely made anything. The only people who make enough with Uber are in large cities that can get in on the prime routes, during the prime times. Very, very few.

Uber is set up to be a thing someone does for extra money, not live off. But that's where this car lease thing is even more sinister. Say someone with a minimum wage job sees this as a chance to provide them with a car to get to and from work. Now if they don't drive enough with Uber they could risk losing both jobs. They kind of become debt-trapped into driving for Uber.

It's easy to get confused. Uber did not give these folks jobs. They are not Uber employees. These people gave themselves jobs as independent contractors for Uber. This is according to Uber themselves.

Ubers way of doing business (ie, independent contractors) is going to be the way a lot of companies start doing business.

And, I bet a lot of drivers in smaller cities don't make much money. But a lot of drivers in larger cities make bank.

When I was living in Columbia, SC last year, we had an Uber driver take us somewhere downtown one day, and she said she doesn't actually live anywhere. She's not homeless, and doesn't live out of her car (which was a rather nice Buick SUV). Apparently she is certified or whatever the hell Uber calls it (licensed? registered?) in every state along the east coast. She said she drives up and down the coast spending a week or two in each state, and stays in cheap motels. Drives full time, all the time.

No idea how common that is or how much complete BS it was. But it was interesting nonetheless.

So Uber is going out of their way to solve their business problem in a way that will hurt the people they rely on to make their money for them. I'm trying to wrap my head around the smartest guy in the room who must have known the impacts of this proposal that OK'ed it anyway - deep cynicism and selfishness on a grand scale.
Corporations are people and that makes Uber one of the biggest douchebags I've ever known. I'll walk before I take a [expletive] Uber ride.

Because of Uber/Lyft's histronics in Austin - forcing an election to replace the city's ordinance with their own preferred, unregulated one, then losing the election due to an arrogant and insulting campaign, then pulling out of the market - several upstart competitors have now set up shop here, and are looking to get their business model and tech ramped up. The lesson is - if you're an arrogant company that treats employees and customers badly because you assume you're the only game in town, you may soon find that you're not.