Yes, I very much do want to go back to a world without Uber.
They're part of a huge step backwards for employee's rights. They might have a good app, but from all the people I know who've used Uber, they use them primarily because they're cheap. They're cheap because their drivers aren't paid well enough and because they evade taxes. Their appropriation of the phrase "sharing economy" is in my opinion spin to avoid the responsibility any employer has towards their employees.
The worst features of Uber are more of a testament to the lack of labor protection in the US than anything wrong with Uber per se. If we had single payer health care, automatic employee protections without ridiculous loopholes, and so forth, then Uber would be fine. Amazon, Walmart, etc. are all built on the ability of US companies to avoid paying people a living wage.
I don't understand this -- what's to prevent an Uber driver from just quitting if he's underpaid? Do you also avoid stores that pay their employees minimum wage?
Do Uber drivers even have an expectation to earn a minimum wage? But to answer your question, yes, I do avoid stores and businesses that are known to treat their employees poorly and e.g. block unionization.
As for "Uber drivers can just quit", I think that's a very simplistic argument. Uber are pricing competitors out of the market (using venture capital!), turning what used to be a fairly decent job into something that's barely enough to scrape by on. The people likely to driver for Uber likely don't have as many options, and probably fewer by the day as jobs that don't require are lot of skills are increasingly being turned into temporary jobs and platform gigs. I'm from Scandinavia, which has a very high degree of social cohesion and low economic inequality, and I see it very mch as a regression and a danger to society.
> turning what used to be a fairly decent job into something that's barely enough to scrape by on
That hasn't been true in the US. In NYC Uber drivers make $30/hr and don't have to work under the existing exploitative Taxi system where they could actually lose money on an unprofitable day. Also, Uber has brought car service to smaller cities (e.g. Mountain View) where there used to be no Taxi system at all (in fact airport taxis would price gouge you for going SFO -> South Bay). Maybe Europe is different but I don't think you can make blanket statements like that.
Well nothing prevents it. [1] In fact they do. The churn rate for Uber is insane. They sign people up and wait for them to realize that after hidden costs (like depreciation and repair) they aren't making much money at all. They are mostly monetizing people's inability to account for expenses.
[1] well some of their car lease deals seem sorta like locking people people in. But I don't know enough about them.
One of the things preventing an Uber driver from just quitting is that Uber drives down price expecations across the board, and so makes it harder for others to pay their drivers a reasonable wage.
You might think that's ok, but in societies where we have agreed that having people go without healthcare or housing, or letting people starve is unacceptable, predatory employers end up in effect subsidised by the state, and those subsidies hurt both tax payers and more ethically run competitors.
> When Brunelle got home, he realized he had signed a loan with a 22.75 percent interest rate. That means he will end up paying around $49,000 on a Kia Optima that normally retails for about $25,000.
Perhaps those people are unemployed, and all they need to be an Uber driver is a driver's license and a car?
Another likely possibility is that people often think their cost to drive someone is just gas ignoring cost of of car registration, insurance, car maintenance etc. Ignoring other costs the Uber's pay seem attractive.
They're part of a huge step backwards for employee's rights. They might have a good app, but from all the people I know who've used Uber, they use them primarily because they're cheap. They're cheap because their drivers aren't paid well enough and because they evade taxes. Their appropriation of the phrase "sharing economy" is in my opinion spin to avoid the responsibility any employer has towards their employees.