French taxi drivers pulled out the throttle in an all-out confrontation with the ultra-cheap Uber car service Thursday, smashing livery cars, setting tires ablaze and blocking traffic during a nationwide strike that caught tourists and celebrities alike in the mayhem. — washingtonpost.com
Parisian taxi drivers have taken to the streets, smashing cars and burning tires to protest UberPop, a budget iteration of the car-sharing service akin to UberX in the States. Traffic came to a stop in the French capital, with reports of stranded travelers walking along the highway with luggage in tow, attempting to catch flights out of Charles de Gaulle airport. So far, 70 vehicles have been reported damaged around France and ten people arrested, according to the AP report.
One passenger caught in Thursday's melee was the singer Courtney Love, who tweeted throughout the experience. Love was able to escape via two men passing by on a motorcycle.
Over the past few weeks, taxi drivers have turned increasingly violent in their opposition to the car-sharing service, which they contend unfairly undercuts their business. Unlike Uber drivers, taxi drivers have to pay tens of thousands of euros for certification each year. Drivers are also frustrated by passenger complaints over a lack of tech-integration.
The French Interior Minister Bernard Cazeneuve met with taxi unions and called for an immediate shutdown to UberPop services in France. Despite court rulings earlier this year and last banning the service, UberPop has continued to operate. The head of UberFrance, Thibaud Simphal went on the radio telling drivers "to continue," asserting that French law "has not demanded that UberPop be forbidden."
This is not the first time that Uber has drawn the ire of taxi drivers and government officials. The tech company is known for flouting laws and has been temporarily suspended from operating in Spain, while a Dutch judge ordered UberPop to stop in the Netherlands.
171 Comments
alternative i was only clarifying your unclear argument that the contractors do pay taxes. they only pay part. my previous post notes that cuts will happen somewhere etc....if more potholes occur because of Uber or whatever becajse certain programs become under funded then people will have to make a decision. i do not care either way. i always hail a yellow cab as they are easier to hail now due to Uber. Uber and the likes will bubble and explode or get bought out like most this quick fix disruptives. taxie cab drivers out of work will find oher means of employment. etc....the world changes constantly,....
Also, this piece from the Guardian—a publication with questionable journalistic integrity that publishes according to partisan tastes, rather than newsworthiness—basically argues that airbnb and Uber are bucking regulatory schemes.
Municipalities have the power to change the rules for these services—they can, and should, regulate them as they see fit. Our elected officials do have a role in shaping how the sharing economy works (see, e.g., San Francisco, which allowed airbnb to enter the market on the condition that its users complied with new rules). But to say that these services are bad "just because" really misses the mark.
Also funny how the top-rated comment on the Guardian is: "I'm an Airbnb host - I declare all of the income and pay tax on it, I spend the proceeds locally. None of it flows into an offshore account. None of pays accountants to be 'tax-effective'. How am I "not good for the economy"?
Articles like these will become more frequent as the hotel industry suffers from a migration of people who prefer to stay in friendly, homely, welcoming places rather than in the disdainful anonymity of a hotel. Perhaps hotels ought, instead of sponsoring agonised wails like this one, to ponder on what they can do to give people what they want."
like citizens, not consumers
Maybe a better way to describe this is as self-interest vs. enlightened self-interest.
Self-interest is buying whatever - often the cheapest thing - without regard for consequent effects to others. Enlightened self-interest is buying those things that support the kind of world you want to live in.
so maybe those folks who wish to earn more should get a college degree or learn a trade
^ The statement of clueless economic bigot. Real unemployment in the US is hovering around 23% and it's not because people don't want to have good jobs.
If at first you don't succeed, call someone a bigot.
Thanks for enlightening me, Miles.
I agree with miles...bigot statement.
It's a sad day in America when it's "bigoted" to state that if one expects to earn more, he or she should bring additional skills to the table.
not everyone can...
Setting aside disability, why can't they?
Because the system (corporate government) rewards those who profit from the removal of civil protections and benefits. The less money you have the higher the deck is stacked against you.
Might I ask, what does your auto insurance say about being a "taxi service"? Do they make you increase your liability, carry collision, etc...?
It would depend on the contract with the insurance company.
right, and how many people who have Uber, are calling their insurance company, and saying, oh, by the way, I'm operating as a car service, shuttling around passengers that aren't my family members, or friends, for commercial means and in which I benefit from financially?
I'll answer that; zero.
Beta, you're wrong. How would über be able to operate lawful if zero insurance companies would cover their drivers? Insurance is statutorily required in every state.
http://www.mercurynews.com/california/ci_26428057/california-senate-approves-new-insurance-requirements-uber-lyft
^
Uber fights against “onerous” insurance requirements despite driver ignorance
coverage dispute between Uber, Lyft, and insurers leaves drivers exposed
Uber Advises Drivers To Buy Insurance That Leaves Them Uncovered
They's still insured, Miles, and it simply won't be available in markets where it thinks coverage is excessive. What is the problem?
whoops. looks like i'm right.
"But insurers are taking a dim view of this accommodation, designed essentially to allow drivers with personal insurance policies to use their cars for ride-sharing services. Some say they will cancel drivers’ personal insurance policies if they find out they are driving passengers for hire."
Did you read the article, beta? They're covered by a commercial policy when passengers are carried, and another policy while they're being hailed.
And Beta, you're describing a problem of fraud by individual drivers, not by Uber.
I think we are all missing the point, you can make more money being an Uber driver than being an architectural intern.
Anonitect hit exactly the issue: we need to think like citizens, not like consumers. The political dialogue in the U.S. since Reagan (damn him) has been that we aren't humans living in a society, we're consumers living in a market.
What are the external costs of disruption, not just Uber but all transitions, and how do they compare to the external costs we pay for whatever current systems we have? I'm looking for comparisons on a deeper level than just how things affect ONE consumer. The world doesn't revolve around just me and whatever I want to buy!
i guess the mantra for an upstart App that manages some type of economic transaction is to figure a way to skirt around overhead costs that the current members in the industry have to pay?..................according to Donald Trump in his recent interview on CNN the reason he makes a good portion of his ties in China and not the US even though he would like to make them in the US, is because the Chinese have manipulated their currency to ensure we can not comptete with low costs. so lets say that is true. if manufacturering is gone, and domesticly the service industries are into a transition in which more and more computers take on the tasks of humans, from Automatic Teller Machines (ATM) to driverless cars, what industries does that leave? what does that leave for the US to export to the world? besides professions, which are also subject to the new world of disruptive technology, custom construction which is being simplified with 3D print technology, entertainment which struggles with new media...what industry that contributes to the national Gross Domesticel Products (GDP) involving humans for the most part - i think that leaves - Banking,Real Estate, and Defense? private property and war? so if another country can cheaply build parts of our fighter jets with rare earth materials by manipulating their currency, where is the power here? must be banking? kickstarter is an interesting way to disrupt traditional raising of funds for corporate creation.......oh i got it now, to have any standard of living you need to be into money in this country, otherwise you are wasting your time......i got it now......disruptive banking Apps?
Donna, businesses are going to continue to figure out new ways to work around systems to make money. This wasn't Reagan's unique invention -- it's as old as capitalism.
Chinese have manipulated their currency to ensure we can not compete with low costs
this is trump pretty clearly admitting communist control over currency creates a more competitive market that the US version of capitalism? if he thought capitalism and the free market was a better system, wouldn't he support that system?
choosing communism over capitalism doesn't seem like a good move for a republican presidential candidate
olaf, tradesmen will be needed. we need plumbing to carry our shit away, and we need plumbers to install the plumbing. since you need a physical person at a physical location to make that happen, it can't be outsourced.
This is Blockbuster vs Netflix. They are protesting because they can't compete in the FREE market. The same anti-Uber camp shops at Target instead of Walmart, like it makes a difference.
I go to the airport on average 4 times per month. A yellow cab costs between $55 and $60 plus tip per trip. Uber costs between $30 and $35 per trip, no tip. Why would I or anyone pay double to a company where they receive a lower quality of service for essentially the same product? In my hundreds of Uber rides I've only left less than 5 stars on handful of occasions. There is no way to weed out shitty cab drivers.
On my last cab ride last week, the driver stopped for gas and to buy cigarettes even though I asked at the airport if he had enough gas to make the half hour drive to my home. Then he gives me a dirty look when I don't tip after I'm left sitting with the windows up in a car at gas station in Dallas. Had this been Uber that driver likely wouldn't be on the road for much longer.
This is Blockbuster vs Netflix. They are protesting because they can't compete in the FREE market. The same anti-Uber camp shops at Target instead of Walmart, like it makes a difference.
Exactly!!!
Everyone likes the free market when they are on top... but once they become obsolete they start crying like little babies...
Meanwhile the real criminals in the Euro banking system and big corps are bleeding the system dry...and they expect uber drivers who are trying to pay bills to give a shit about the rules...Like a mobster calling the police on a jaywalker
it's not a free market. the government intervenes with cab drivers in a way that it doesn't intervene with uber drivers. this illustration is the exact opposite of how a free market works.
did you miss the part above where donald trump said he would rather have the chinese produce his ties because communism is a better vehicle for capitalism?
Yes, jla, because Greece is an innocent victim!
we can save that for the other thread....
it's not a free market. the government intervenes with cab drivers in a way that it doesn't intervene with uber drivers. this illustration is the exact opposite of how a free market works.
It should be though...
businesses are going to continue to figure out new ways to work around systems to make money. This wasn't Reagan's unique invention -- it's as old as capitalism.
And thus we have the ultimate essence of capitalism - profit by any and every means possible without regard for anything else because everything else is an expense that diminishes profit.
If you want to know why wars are fought, environments destroyed, people treated inhumanely, it's all right there: profit first, last and only.
Miles, but regulations on the game and on the player are 2 completely different things...We can have a FREE market within a set of laws and regulations that dictate the limits of the game without imposing protectionist burdens on the players...Basically, anyone can take a shot and compete in the ring... just cant do steroids or punch below the belt...I am all for strict rules that minimize environmental damage and all...just not for these fascist policies that act to give state protection over certain privatized monopolies and industries...It is a recipe for stagnation of innovation, further centralization of wealth, and a lack of upward mobility due to barriers of entry...
I wish we had a "like" feature for comments on Archinect. jla, completely agree with everything you've written. It's as though those participating in the conversation are willfully ignoring the horrors of totalitarian communism and planned economies.
as curtkram flipped the Trump stuff....you guys are all missing the amazing benefits of communism. ...........See an Apple tree takes a damn long time to grow to bear fruits. In a capitalists society you better be crafty in getting Apples while you wait 20 years or whatever for the trees to grow and bear fruit. The communists just go out and plant millions of acres and pay people to tend them based on taxes from elsewhere and then one day they flood the market with an equal amount of apples as the capitalist world has been providing. they severely undercut the competition and do not loose much becuase the last 20 years were subsidized by other industries. and just like Rockfellar Standard Oil they put the competition out of business and all you have left with are communist Apples. they then control the currency of the Apple and the rest of the entrepreneur Apple Orchard people are just fucked. Every good Capitalist uses social systems and communism to their benefit of course. A bad Capitalist tries to compete.
Why does the internet always devolve into fucking stupid. Just because the Soviet Union sucked doesn't mean that government shouldn't regulate businesses.
now if a business man like Trump became the president that might get interesting. maybe we get a reality show with it like " Trump in the White House". big Trump sign on the white house.
regulate the people means you hold people accountable for their actions and make sure professions that could potentially hurt the public are competent. that's what you want to get rid of? competency?
trying to parse what you said olaf. so, if you want to feed people apples, be a communist? what do capitalists do with the apples? let them rot on the tree since they count as an asset on the books and you invest on margin with the apples as collateral, then you can collect off insurance once they're no good anymore?
Where did anyone say that they were anti-regulation?
jla is opposed to regulation. he thinks the game could be regulated without putting regulations (such as an architect license) on people.
Quoting him: "We can have a FREE market within a set of laws and regulations that dictate the limits of the game without imposing protectionist burdens on the players..."
doesn't that mean he's anti-regulation when it comes to imposing protectionist burdens on the players?
Anti-protectionism ≠ anti-regulation
We can have a FREE market within a set of laws and regulations that dictate the limits of the game without imposing protectionist burdens on the players
If we can then why don't we?
just not for these fascist policies that act to give state protection over certain privatized monopolies and industries...
The industries and monopolies and the state are one. oBOMBaCare should have made that absolutely clear to even the dimmest bulb by now. Health insurers wrote the law, pharmaceutical corporations were exempted from price controls and the Federal government forces citizens to buy private for-profit insurance. There is no free market - only artificially limited "networks" that eliminate competition and choice.
Capitalism is a recipe for stagnation of innovation, further centralization of wealth, and a lack of upward mobility due to barriers of entry
I think that we're beginning to agree, Miles.
You're not describing capitalism. You're describing regulatory capture.
that's right curtkram, let the apples rot while the commune feeds the people, the insurance companies fill some guys pockets with GOLD which is not edible...
wait, is Communism a disruptive social technology?
You're not describing capitalism. Youre describing regulatory capture.
Well said Alternative!
communism can only work if all people in charge are good...which is impossible as power always attracts shit heads...
Preach, jla.
I think that we're beginning to agree, Miles.
That makes one of us.
You're not describing capitalism. You're describing regulatory capture.
Regulatory capture is a product of capitalism.
communism can only work if all people in charge are good...which is impossible as power always attracts shit heads...
And exactly how is that different from capitalism?
omg miles you're so clever because regulatory capture totally doesn't exist in communist regimes.
miles, communism is static...capitalism allows for change...change is sustainable...if something cannot adapt it will die...nature is capitalist...which is why it works (or vica-versa)...shit heads rise and fall in capitalism...the inevitable advance of technology and human innovation assure this...heavily manipulated systems, like the one we have, use the external force of the state to prevent change defying the main virtue of a free market...
Block this user
Are you sure you want to block this user and hide all related comments throughout the site?
Archinect
This is your first comment on Archinect. Your comment will be visible once approved.