Comments

You must log in or register to comment.

6

__deleted_____ wrote (edited )

I think there should be a ban on all cars in all cities limits. Just public transport and bikes.

4

___deleted______ wrote

Well the people who can afford to use Uber rather than take the train or the bus are pretty well off, and the drivers are rich enough to buy a car, so I don't really care.

8

sudo wrote

Unless Uber doesn't let you drive with a car that you're still paying for, I doubt many of the drivers own the car - they are probably paying a car note every month. Uber drivers are exploited workers.

3

_ziq_ wrote

No. They're only doing it to placate the 'licensed' taxi drivers. Fuck that.

1

Prismatic_Iguana wrote

Uber still encourages and directly subsidizes cars as a thing. There is no reason for people to own cars, especially within the city. Public transportation is a thing people!

1

sudo wrote

There is no reason for people to own cars, especially within the city.

Sure there is. Having your own car means that you can go wherever you want to, without having to wait for a bus or subway, or being delayed because the bus route doesn't go directly where you want to go. I don't know how good London's mass transit it, but my city's mass transit is terrible - I wouldn't be able to get to my job without a car.

1

sudo wrote

I'm torn. One the one hand, it would be getting rid of a shitty, exploitative company. But on the other hand, it would mean lots of people would lose their jobs.

0

Mance wrote

No. If people want to charge people to give them a lift, the government should stay out of the way. If I give my buddy a lift and he gives me $5 for gas money, what right does the government have to get involved? Put an app in front of it and thats uber.

-1

ChairmanLOL wrote

No, i think we should move towards a fairer barter economy and things like Uber take the power out of the hands of distant companies and make it a direct transaction. It has to be money now but soon it will be services and art or whatever.