Sorry, fell asleep a bit on this one guys.
I'll accept Sirnick's amendment as friendly.
I would refer everyone to the events transpiring in Sydney where Uber quadrupled their base rate to $100 for the area surrounding the hostage situation. Could you imagine something happening like that during the events of the bombing of the Boston Marathon, for example? Secondly, I'm sure you have all seen the allegations in India and Chicago of Uber drivers raping passengers; without attempting to act as a court of law here, surely this compromises part of the company's prized confidence in their drivers.
In response to these incidents, I am opposed to the bill.
The rape incident is problematic, but it seems like a jump to conclusions to fault Uber for this. For instance, part of the India problem is that Uber's outfit in India is
shoestring at best.
This may be because India itself has an ineffective criminal justice system. Rape is a serious problem in India
in general.citationWith regards to the Chicago case, there are instances of regular taxi drivers
assaulting passengers.I'll agree that price gouging is fool-hardy policy and not good for PR. What hasn't been mentioned here is that Uber's pricing is actually
automatic.In other words, the price of Uber cabs fluctuate in response to demand. This isn't unique to Uber. For instance,
it's cheaper to fly on a Wednesday than it is to fly right before a holiday.