[dawnbreez]

So, Uber:

>Provides the same service at lower costs

>Pays more to drivers who drive at peak hours, by charging more at those times

>Is (gasp!) not charging its drivers hundreds of thousands of dollars for the privelige of having someone barf on their seats

Okay, the accusations of driver-poaching and underhanded tactics are bad...but then again, the driver poaching could just be drivers going where the better money is.

In fact, I'd say this is capitalism at its best. It's providing a service where the service is needed at a fraction of the cost, and without having to wait for anyone else's say-so.

[ThomPete]

You are cherry picking.

Here is some other cherry picking.

Uber doesn't allow it's drivers to set their own prices even though they are freelancers and not employees.

Uber doesn't compensate for that by at least promoting tips.

Uber doesn't allow the drivers to sub-contract to other drivers.

Because there is no upper limit on how many drivers there can be, each uber driver is in effect going to fight for less and less market.

Oh yeah and Uber is working on replacing all their drivers.

These are just a few of the issues with uber and is hardly capitalism at it's best.

[dawnbreez]

Fair enough. There are tradeoffs.

My comment was, honestly, more defensive than anything else. I saw that the article was making broad statements and misrepresenting the problem, and I proceeded to do the same in return. It's silly and I should've known better.

[ThomPete]

Well I too find the article misrepresenting the problem but for different reasons :) (see my other comment in this thread)