Pennsylvania Reinstates Uber's Record $11.4 Million Fine

[HardOCP News]

I'm no expert on this subject but it seems to me that the best way to avoid this type of fine is to obey the law by getting the proper licensing before doing business in that state. Then again, this is Uber we are talking about, they do whatever the hell they want.

By a 4-1 vote, the Pennsylvania Public Utility Commission rejected Uber's arguments that the penalty, six times larger than any it had imposed, was unnecessary and excessive. Uber, in a statement, said it intends to appeal to a Pennsylvania state court, and overturn what it called an "absurd" fine imposed for "technical violations." The PUC, which regulates taxi services and Uber rivals such as Lyft, had sanctioned Uber for having from February to August 2014 provided 122,998 rides in Pennsylvania without prior approval, and obstructing a state probe into its operations.

 

[nysmo]

Because Taxi shills are apparently lurking on every forum, on multiple occasions I have almost decided to start a sort of "grassroots" campaign of just taking pictures of any taxi driver I see anywhere, just to demonstrate how every single one of them fits the stereotype of disgusting sleezy looking smelly cab driver, and how much better it is to ride in a nice clean Honda Accord or Hundai Santa Fe instead of some 20 year old beat down crown vic.

 

[Zarathustra[H]]

Because Taxi shills are apparently lurking on every forum, on multiple occasions I have almost decided to start a sort of "grassroots" campaign of just taking pictures of any taxi driver I see anywhere, just to demonstrate how every single one of them fits the stereotype of disgusting sleezy looking smelly cab driver, and how much better it is to ride in a nice clean Honda Accord or Hundai Santa Fe instead of some 20 year old beat down crown vic.

No ones arguing that taxis can't be gross, and Uber's aren't usually better (though not all of them are perfect either).

At issue here is why some people think it is OK for large companies to blatantly violate the law, and not face consequences for it.

The law may be wrong, and in that case, fight to change it first, BEFORE doing what is illegal under it.

The amusing part is that most people arguing that it is the regulations that are the problem, and that Uber should be doing what it is doing, are the same people who will then turn around and consider themselves to be supporters of "law and order".

 

[nysmo]

Ubers most certainly ARE usually better. I've used uber probably 20 times, not one of them has ever been anything remotely close to a taxi cab. Lexus's, Toyota's, SUV's, Sedan's, they've all been no more than 5 years old I'd guess, very clean, and the drivers looked like normal people like you and me. They had the GPS app running right there on the dash so you could see the exact route that was being given and know you werent being fucked with. On several occasions they even had Waze running on a second device right next to their uber device further ensuring optimal routing. I've also probably used a taxi 20 times in my life, and every single time they took fucked up back alley routes that were clearly designed to run up the tab. Even when I called them out on it I would get some defensive "no no no my friend, trust me this way faster" and I just roll my eyes as I careen through some random neighborhood I've never seen but recognize 5-10 minutes have been added to my trip since I'm aware of the "usual" way home.

Nobody who argues for "law and order" ever supports corrupt laws. There is no hypocrisy taking place here when one violates an established monopoly. Furthermore most supports of Uber genuinely do not see them as a taxi service, any more than Craigslist is an online shopping center.

 

[FLECOM]

Because Taxi shills are apparently lurking on every forum, on multiple occasions I have almost decided to start a sort of "grassroots" campaign of just taking pictures of any taxi driver I see anywhere, just to demonstrate how every single one of them fits the stereotype of disgusting sleezy looking smelly cab driver, and how much better it is to ride in a nice clean Honda Accord or Hundai Santa Fe instead of some 20 year old beat down crown vic.

I work at an airport, and I can't tell you how 100% accurate this is... I have heard stories from the curbside people that assist passengers getting transportation of making taxi drivers go wash their cars because they can smell them from the curb... plus they mess up traffic something fierce... I can't wait for taxis to go away

 

[SLee]

how much better it is to ride in a nice clean Honda Accord or Hundai Santa Fe instead of some 20 year old beat down crown vic.

You better enjoy it while it lasts, given Uber's low rates, you'll be hard pressed to find anything other than 10+ year old Prius soon. Not surprising that Uber has to relax its vehicle requirements to 15 years in many markets just to find enough desperate drivers.

And you know what, putting hundreds of thousand miles with tens of thousands of strangers will make pretty much any car terrible.

Furthermore most supports of Uber genuinely do not see them as a taxi service, any more than Craigslist is an online shopping center.

Most paid Uber shills perhaps. Does Craiglist determine what sellers can sell, what they can charge, who they can sell to, collect money on behalf of the seller?

 

[sboucher]

All this shit isn't going to matter once they get their self driving fleet on the road..

 

[nysmo]

Most paid Uber shills perhaps. Does Craiglist determine what sellers can sell, what they can charge, who they can sell to, collect money on behalf of the seller?

No, but only because they make their money elsewhere. So instead of CL we'll use Ebay. Should Amazon be able to shut down Ebay because Ebay is selling the same products but is totally not regulated by certain standards that Amazon might have to adhere to? Or should Amazon be shut down by WalMart for the same reason? It is your car. If someone wants to pay me 20 bucks for a ride across town that is my business, and the app that connects us just gets a cut. This is so fucking far from how taxi's work it's not even comparable.

 

[Dekoth-E-]

This thread reminds me why I own a car and if I'm traveling why I rent.

 

[Admiral Equinox]

This thread reminds me why I own a car and if I'm traveling why I rent.

For those of us who live in dense population cities, this comment literally contributes fuckall to the conversation.
I'm not buying a car and paying NYC insurance under any circumstance, and in most cases, you don't even have to, given our mass transportation system. (Which, more often than not, can also be pretty fucking terrible with a single sick passenger.)

Uber has plenty of benefit for people like me, who can use them for work, personal to-from destinations that i don't do frequently. Now don't get me wrong, I don't like their business practice more than anyone else, but Uber/Lyft/etc have been great for me, with some excellent fucking cars most times I've ever had to hail one.

p.s. who actually doesn't rent a damn car when they travel?

 

[Dekoth-E-]

I'm not buying a car and paying NYC insurance under any circumstance

As someone who has lived in a densely populated city, That is your choice and there are consequences to that choice. Public transportation is awful and if I never have to ride it again it will be to soon. Personally I will choose to pay more money to not deal with public transportation or the scum that typically operate taxi type services.

 

[Admiral Equinox]

lol, "that is your choice".

 

[Deleted member 126051]

You better enjoy it while it lasts, given Uber's low rates, you'll be hard pressed to find anything other than 10+ year old Prius soon. Not surprising that Uber has to relax its vehicle requirements to 15 years in many markets just to find enough desperate drivers.

And you know what, putting hundreds of thousand miles with tens of thousands of strangers will make pretty much any car terrible.

Saw an ad on Craigslist earlier this year when I was looking for a minivan.

2010 Dodge Caravan.

But the price was less than a third of what it SHOULD be going for.

Turns out it was a cab and basically had 360K miles on it...

Cue interest fading fast.

The last thing I needed was to buy it and immediately replace everything in the engine compartment, transmission and exhaust.

 

[OpenSource]

At issue here is why some people think it is OK for large companies to blatantly violate the law, and not face consequences for it.

The law may be wrong, and in that case, fight to change it first, BEFORE doing what is illegal under it.

The amusing part is that most people arguing that it is the regulations that are the problem, and that Uber should be doing what it is doing, are the same people who will then turn around and consider themselves to be supporters of "law and order".

It is easier to swallow law breaking companies like Uber since they seem to be viewed favorably by those who consume their products since they offer a better value than overpriced taxi services.

To contrast, it's why you see the massive amounts of bitching and moaning about ISPs or Cell providers when they jack up prices with no actual value added or if they're caught breaking the law and appeal the ruling for years.

 

[Zarathustra[H]]

Nobody who argues for "law and order" ever supports corrupt laws. There is no hypocrisy taking place here when one violates an established monopoly. Furthermore most supports of Uber genuinely do not see them as a taxi service, any more than Craigslist is an online shopping center.

Most people in general don't like corrupt laws, but living in a civil society governed by law and order means you don't get to be a special snowflake and pick and choose the ones that apply to you. All laws on the book apply. If a person or company doesn't like them they have the ability to fight them through various political actions. Even if successful in removing them, they still apply until the very second they are overturned.

If you do something illegal today, you are caught, but the law changes tomorrow and it is no longer illegal, you should still face the full penalty of the law, because you violated the law at the time. Law and order has an intrinsic value in and of itself, as it avoids anarchy. We can't have the chaos of special snowflakes choosing for themselves which laws shouldn't apply to them.

Everyone has laws they like, laws they don't, laws they think are wrong and laws they think are right. That doesn't mean they can pick and choose which to obey. They can fight to change the laws they think are wrong, but those laws still apply to them and everyone else until the second they are changed.

 

[DrLobotomy]

New word of the day: Revulturized -adverb?... The condition of having bones picked clean after vulture flying away but getting lost and returning to re-feast.

 

[nysmo]

If you do something illegal today, you are caught, but the law changes tomorrow and it is no longer illegal, you should still face the full penalty of the law, because you violated the law at the time.

That is absurd. Laws are not handed down by the word of god. They are nothing more than a set of criteria meant to establish a standard of living that society has deemed productive. If society has moved the benchmark then of course anything that happened prior to that should be null and void, because it serves no purpose to behold someone to a standard that no longer exists.

Furthermore, change is often spurred through protest. This protest can take any shape or form. This fairy tale that a law should never be re-examined without someone going through proper due course is also absurd. Sometimes it takes something extraordinary to get people's attention to go about changing the law the "legal way". Sometimes you have to shout for your voice to be heard, raising your hand can go unnoticed.