Replies

To be clear, you are supporting the lawless usurpation of existing law by a syndicate of corporate suits and investors, not private citizenry, using drivers seeking an income as pawns and victimizing drivers, passengers and pedestrians with their irresponsible actions. You defend this with the emotional argument akin to some sort of 'tea party'. The argument is far from Conservative. To the contrary, it's to the benefit of libs/progs everywhere to draw this out. Standing? The lawless Uber & Lyft have destroyed their standing by not trying to change the laws. Rather, they broke them in the pursuit of profits.

The laws are stupid, and protect no one. I support any corporation that breaks stupid laws to give the consumers a better product.

Given their popularity, it sounds like they have a better product that the city cab system.

Fact is, politicians don't give a whit about the 'safety' or 'quality' of taxi cab drivers. The cab system is a revenue model for the powers-that-be, nothing more. Why should they put resources into changing something that is useless, and will fall into irrelevancy son enough? If a law is not enforced anymore, is it really still a law? The people are clamoring for these services, regardless of whether or not it's legal.

...better product...

Hmmm...

Would YOU purchase a product that had no warranty? No product liability? Even IF that product had the potential to cause injury or death out of no fault of your own?

Would YOU hop on a bus or a train ONLY after signing a waiver and accept ALL risk for the trip?

Would YOU hop in a friend's car having done the same for a trip to the bank or what-not?

No sane person would answer yes to those.

From Uber TOU:

“The company…does not intend to provide transportation services or act in any way as a transportation carrier, and has no responsibility or liability for any transportation services provided to you…”
“…you agree that you shall defend, indemnify and hold the Company, its licensors and each such party’s parent organizations, subsidiaries, affiliates, officers, directors, Users, employees, attorneys and agents harmless from and against any and all claims, costs, damages, losses, liabilities and expenses”
“You acknowledge and agree that you and Company are each waiving the right to a trial by jury or to participate as a plaintiff…in any purported class action or representative proceeding.”
“You may be exposed to transportation that is potentially dangerous, offensive, harmful to minors, unsafe or otherwise objectionable, and…you use the application and the service at your own risk.”

It is reckless & irresponsible of so-called 'customers' of the Uber App to endeavor activity under which they have questionable legal protection. My big problem with this is that, so far, the ONLY people being enriched by 'ride-sharing' are the investors & lawyers...and taxpayers will ultimately end up picking up the tab (the 'reckless' part) and it will be sold to us with a liberal/emotional argument about taking care of 'the (irresponsible) little people'.

My other BIG problem with this, particularly your comment,

I support any corporation that breaks stupid laws to give the consumers a better product.

...is that that is

EXACTLY what the corporation called Dept. of Health & Human Services, in conjunction with the other corporation called the Internal Revenue Service, under the aegis of corporate 'officers' Nancy Pelosi, Barack Obama, Harry Reid, Jonathan Gruber (to name a few) did with HEALTHCARE!!!!!

...at least that was the bold print on the candy wrapper...to get everyone involved emotionally in 'changing the status quo', 'save $$' and 'provide better services'. Sounds familiar, right? (that last was 'rhetorical').