KCRag Forum

pash wrote: They definitely don't want their drivers to be treated like employees, or like professional cab drivers; they want them to be treated like ordinary people driving their own cars, because Uber's business model entails getting a lot of ordinary people to take people places in their own cars.

This anti-technology ordinance eliminates more than 1,000 jobs in Kansas City and creates nearly a dozen barriers to entry for small businesses.

joshmv wrote:Just took an uber car and the driver said Uber sent them an email saying they're committed to KC and he doesn't believe they'll leave at all. Hope he's right.

pash wrote:This is what I mean when I say that we should stop resorting to regulations with real costs to solve hypothetical problems. If there's a real problem that needs solving, fine. But don't pretend that the city can justify throwing up roadblocks that purport to hold Uber to some minimal standard of service when reality suggests that Uber themselves do a great job providing a level of service well above that minimal standard.

Regulations should solve real problems, not fake ones, and the higher the costs they impose on regulated parties—and all of us, indirectly—the more evidence we should require that the many dollars and hours spent complying with them really are solving a real problem. We have zero evidence of a real problem here, much less one that justifies spending a lot of time and money fixing.

KCPowercat wrote:They aren't going anywhere.

aknowledgeableperson wrote:And I thought it was just an technology company, not a taxicab service.