Uber and Lyft approved to pick up passengers at Sky Harbor (Phoenix: 2014, rental)

[Mike Warner]

Originally Posted by azriverfan.

The hypocrisy of the "pro business" party strikes again. I thought conservatives cut through red tape and increased opportunities for all. If you look at Republican's track record in this state, they have fought against progress. They opposed expansion of light rail. They oppose legalizing marijuana which would generat 100's of millions of dollars for the state. They opposed the West Valley casino. They opposed Fantasy Sports.

Sounds like the pro business people are doing just that, protecting businesses from higher costs and running them out of business. Uber is one of those lefty liberal ideas.
Expansion of light rail would not be a business but a public service and a public cost. Plenty of Liberals on this site who oppose light rail.

[exit2lef]

The four dissenting council members wanted to separate the ground transportation policy into two separate votes. One part would have been an approval for Uber and Lyft to pick up passengers at Sky Harbor. The four stated clearly that they would have voted yes on that part. They suggested a second part that would have sent the increase in fees for hotel and off-airport parking shuttles back to city staff for further evaluation instead of adopting them immediately. A council majority, however, wanted to approve the new ground transportation policy as an entire package, so the minority voted no despite their support for Uber and Lyft. Many conservatives, including Governor Ducey, are strong supporters of what's sometimes called "the sharing economy," so the no votes by certain city council members may be surprising in the absence of detail about what actually happened at the meeting.

[Bondurant]

Originally Posted by exit2lef

The four dissenting council members wanted to separate the ground transportation policy into two separate votes. One part would have been an approval for Uber and Lyft to pick up passengers at Sky Harbor. The four stated clearly that they would have voted yes on that part. They suggested a second part that would have sent the increase in fees for hotel and off-airport parking shuttles back to city staff for further evaluation instead of adopting them immediately. A council majority, however, wanted to approve the new ground transportation policy as an entire package, so the minority voted no despite their support for Uber and Lyft. Many conservatives, including Governor Ducey, are strong supporters of what's sometimes called "the sharing economy," so the no votes by certain city council members may be surprising in the absence of detail about what actually happened at the meeting.

Yeah, I did some research and found just that. In the link provided in the original post and others I read it made the Uber/Lyft ruling sound as if it were a stand alone decision when it was, in fact, packaged with a carpooling tax to the airport.

[Ztonyg]

Originally Posted by exit2lef

The four dissenting council members wanted to separate the ground transportation policy into two separate votes. One part would have been an approval for Uber and Lyft to pick up passengers at Sky Harbor. The four stated clearly that they would have voted yes on that part. They suggested a second part that would have sent the increase in fees for hotel and off-airport parking shuttles back to city staff for further evaluation instead of adopting them immediately. A council majority, however, wanted to approve the new ground transportation policy as an entire package, so the minority voted no despite their support for Uber and Lyft. Many conservatives, including Governor Ducey, are strong supporters of what's sometimes called "the sharing economy," so the no votes by certain city council members may be surprising in the absence of detail about what actually happened at the meeting.

The "sharing economy" is nothing more than a scam to turn previously decent paying jobs into terrible paying jobs with no benefits where the only people who profit are the executives at the "sharing" company.

Uber and Lyft have essentially killed any ability for anyone to be paid decently for transporting people. Their prices are so low compared to taxis (1/2 to 1/3 the price) and they only pay their drivers 72 - 80% of their ridiculously low fares (minus a $1.80 "booking fee"). For these ridiculously low rates drivers are responsible for gas, maintenance, and ownership of a vehicle.

If the airport required fingerprinting and additional background checks, I'm sure that many Uber/Lyft drivers would feel it too burdensome to even bother going through any more "hoops" as they just don't get paid well enough as it is.

However, politicians have no clue that most "sharing" drivers are making less than minimum wage.

[Prickly Pear]

Originally Posted by azriverfan.

The hypocrisy of the "pro business" party strikes again. I thought conservatives cut through red tape and increased opportunities for all. If you look at Republican's track record in this state, they have fought against progress. They opposed expansion of light rail. They oppose legalizing marijuana which would generat 100's of millions of dollars for the state. They opposed the West Valley casino. They opposed Fantasy Sports.

Wait guys, hold on the political debate, I need to grab some popcorn!

[ScottsdaleMark]

Originally Posted by Ztonyg

The "sharing economy" is nothing more than a scam to turn previously decent paying jobs into terrible paying jobs with no benefits where the only people who profit are the executives at the "sharing" company.

Uber and Lyft have essentially killed any ability for anyone to be paid decently for transporting people. Their prices are so low compared to taxis (1/2 to 1/3 the price) and they only pay their drivers 72 - 80% of their ridiculously low fares (minus a $1.80 "booking fee"). For these ridiculously low rates drivers are responsible for gas, maintenance, and ownership of a vehicle.

If the airport required fingerprinting and additional background checks, I'm sure that many Uber/Lyft drivers would feel it too burdensome to even bother going through any more "hoops" as they just don't get paid well enough as it is.

However, politicians have no clue that most "sharing" drivers are making less than minimum wage.

I could not agree more. This is kind of the same as hiring a licensed/bonded contractor or landscaper, versus picking someone up at Home Depot for the day for cash in hand. You get what you pay for. My fear is that ride-sharing services will kill the taxi industry to the point where cabs become extinct or few and far between, and THEN what do you think the ride-sharing services will do to their rates? There's no lid on what they can charge, unlike taxis, which is why every New Year's or big holiday you see articles about how people are complaining about how high the Uber surge pricing got.

I understand many ridesharing drivers are nice people, but they're getting a terrible deal. I guess that's the thing about jobs that pretty much anyone can do ... they don't pay very well. Taxi driving isn't particularly rewarding monetarily even with the higher rates, the money is in running as many hours out of every 24 as you can (e.g. NYC where they can run a cab around the clock with different drivers). I can't imagine how anyone's getting by on Uber wages unless they're working 60, 80 hours a week or more.

[DetroitN8V]

Originally Posted by ScottsdaleMark

I could not agree more. This is kind of the same as hiring a licensed/bonded contractor or landscaper, versus picking someone up at Home Depot for the day for cash in hand. You get what you pay for. My fear is that ride-sharing services will kill the taxi industry to the point where cabs become extinct or few and far between, and THEN what do you think the ride-sharing services will do to their rates? There's no lid on what they can charge, unlike taxis, which is why every New Year's or big holiday you see articles about how people are complaining about how high the Uber surge pricing got.

I understand many ridesharing drivers are nice people, but they're getting a terrible deal. I guess that's the thing about jobs that pretty much anyone can do ... they don't pay very well. Taxi driving isn't particularly rewarding monetarily even with the higher rates, the money is in running as many hours out of every 24 as you can (e.g. NYC where they can run a cab around the clock with different drivers). I can't imagine how anyone's getting by on Uber wages unless they're working 60, 80 hours a week or more.

Sounds like letting the free-market decide what works. What's wrong with that? Aren't conservatives supposed to be AGAINST government intrusion?

[ScottsdaleMark]

Originally Posted by DetroitN8V

Sounds like letting the free-market decide what works. What's wrong with that? Aren't conservatives supposed to be AGAINST government intrusion?

There's a difference between a free market and a partially regulated marked that leaves an uneven playing field for different competitors. That's what ridesharing services are exploiting right now.

If all companies faced zero regulation -- or if all companies faced the same regulations -- Uber and Lyft's valuations would be a mere fraction of what they are currently.

Given that the livery market has been regulated for many decades, I think it's ridiculous that the head of state government is saying, sure, come on in and make money off the regulation over which I preside.

Fix the problem, don't just preferentially enable certain companies to succeed while forcing others to continue to deal with burdensome regulations.

[wit-nit]

Beware of uber's fake vomit fraud....this report was on the TV news this am.
Are Uber Drivers Faking Vomit In Their Cars To Collect Hundreds Of Dollars?: Gothamist

[ScottsdaleMark]

I saw that...fortunately you can still vomit for free in taxi cabs.

Those old Crown Vics with the all-vinyl-everything made for an easy hose-down...with the new Prius cabs, I have to imagine it's much more of a pain in the butt to deal with when it happens.

I know I couldn't stand hauling drunks around, but everyone says weekend nights are when taxis/limos/etc. make the most money by far, so I guess it's just the price of being in that industry.