Anonymous, 20 Dec 2017If that's the case then the better stop f***ing around and make Bitcoin an official currency...The court ruled that Uber is a taxi company because it works like a company. Bitcoin doesnt work like a currency. for this it has to be able to be used as a means for value transfer, savings and calculation
You cannot use it as for transactions (try to buy something with bitcoin at your lokcal store) and because transactions take so much time; It doesn't work as a savings tool (meaning, the price fluctuates that much that You never know how much or how little You currently own or You get at the end of the week, when you'd get your Bitcoin-paycheck); And it doesn't work as a means of calculations (to compare prices and values (e.g. a coffee cost 30 minutes of paid work), because the price fluctuates and almost nothing can be bought with Bitcoin).
Maybe, probably someday Bitcoin is able to do all that, than it will as a currency and can be called a currency. Until then it is only a speculative asset.
uber brought taxi filthy thinking into silicon era and it crashed badly... result is what we see every week news about uber wrongdoing...
just refactor uber == bankrupt and new companies with honest approach towards customer and law will be created
T1bbe, 21 Dec 2017So what you are saying is all taxi company's should make an app and thus pay less taxes just b... moreBut Uber isn't being asked to avoid using technology or for others to avoid evolving and adapting around technology (as they still can do) they are just being asked to respect and pay comparable staff benefits and wages so to not use technology as a manipulative loophole to circumvent proper staff rights and gain an unfair advantage against other competitors. It doesn't stop them using apps as the way to engage customers but only stops them treating staff as self employed and without rights despite working for a centralised company regardless of it going through an app or a phone.
AnonD-4954, 21 Dec 2017the rule should take account benefit for the people, not in favor to the taxi companies, shame... moreSo what you are saying is all taxi company's should make an app and thus pay less taxes just because they are now an e-comp? So that would make it kinda like a taxes scam.
Maybe uber started as a e-comp, but by now its definitely a glorified taxi company.
And you should really look op the word monopoly. You cant say, company's (plural) and monopoly in the same sentence
Taxi drivers in my country are horrible. I'm lucky I own a car and don't need to use them. But a few months back I had to take one cos my car was in the service.
1. The driver looked like he just got up from a ditch where he was drinking all day.
2. His car was an old dirty piece of sht that smelled horrible.
3. He NEVER turned the meter on. When asked about it he said : "We're grown men, we" ll figure it out.
4. For a 20 euro ride he wanted 60!
5. He started asking me for cigarettes!
6. He saw I was well dressed and started asking me if i can get a job for his unemployed son.
7. Then he effing dared to ask me if I have some girls for him.
8. I had a 100euro bill and of course he did
the law regresses...
you have to cope up, times are changing... did you know that they didn't give driver's of horse-drawn carriages before?
machines help people, now software + machine help people.
would you leave the people behind?
This decision makes sense: the Uber app is indeed a digital service, but the additional rules and guidelines that Uber imposes on its drivers and their vehicles - despite its transparent attempts to appear differently - makes it a digitized transport provider with a unique business model.
That said, the EU - and many other bodies - better start thinking fast as to the inevitable rise of driverless taxis, which are between 5-10 years away from serious commercial viability. This is technologically and financially inevitable, but can still be stifled by EU laws...and I have no doubt that the EU is quite capable of that.
AnonD-4954, 21 Dec 2017the rule should take account benefit for the people, not in favor to the taxi companies, shame... moreHow can It be a monopoly when there are other systems for transportation like buses and metro stations?. Besides this is also for the good and security of the people using the service. Having a driver with an accurate/proper background check and knowledge of the road rules going through extensive training and tests just to be a taxi driver plus vehicle approval to see if it fits consumer standards. Theirs a larger number of cases where Uber drivers are abusing this system than taxi drivers. Like Fixed rates, unsanitary vehicles, rude drivers etc. The Uber system is not safe in anyway.
the rule should take account benefit for the people, not in favor to the taxi companies, shame on them, uber incorporated technology, old taxi companies should adapt or evolve, in a sense its kind of a monopoly by taxi companies.
They did that in Taiwan too, calling Uber a taxi and forcing major regulation. I stopped using it after that since the price went up higher than even the local cab companies.
Ubers main selling point was price, if they lose that advantage why bother with them
Well, it is not good for the end user that will see price spikes. I've been using Uber ever since it came out, never used a Taxi a single time ever since and never looked back. Not only the prices, but the service is infinitely better, and works worldwide, so I can just call a ride wherever I travel to easily.
Akinaro, 20 Dec 2017If we fallow that reasoning, Google, or rather Alphabet company(that is just fake business of ... moreu just don't know how much paperwork to get a taxi running legally and they just cant put their charge on their own just for benefit but if they overcharge then its your faiult not knowing the price rate per km / its been unfair since the uber is paperless and using just car for payment , that's not good
It clearly is a taxi company and nothing else
Akinaro, 20 Dec 2017If we fallow that reasoning, Google, or rather Alphabet company(that is just fake business of ... moreMy local cab firm charges me £36 to go to Gatwick Airport. Uber charges between £48 and £75 for same journey.
Uber also gives cars to drivers and charges them 25% per ride commission plus £250 per week for car and insurance.
Finally! Common sense prevails!
They looks like normal taxi service, They smell like normal taxi service and their markings show a normal taxi service.
So uber is Normal taxi service.
But they play some kind of puppy.
The customer pay for the transportation, and Uber get paid for, percentage, the transportation, so Uber is the administrative part of a normal "Taxi-company"!
Akinaro, 20 Dec 2017If we fallow that reasoning, Google, or rather Alphabet company(that is just fake business of ... moreActually, in a country like the Netherlands, Uber is just another taxi company, due to the rules that drivers have to adhere to by law. Meaning they need a permit, a car with proper taxi equipment and all.
The main difference is that everything works through Ubers app.
Uber even lets you lease a prepped car for hundreds of euro's a month, if you can't affort getting one yourself. In all, it's a modern taxi company, but a taxi company none the less. This goes for more countries in the EU.
nkwama, 20 Dec 2017Oh Poor Uber. What about other ride sharing companies like Taxify, Lyft etc simmilar to Uber? Not enough money for them to extort.
Oh Poor Uber. What about other ride sharing companies like Taxify, Lyft etc simmilar to Uber?