Saturday, July 23, 2016

More on Government/Uber Corruption

I am just browsing through the Toronto's new Vehicle for Hire bylaw information. Some of it is quite entertaining from the point of view of someone who has actually driven a cab (A.K.A. "ridesharing.")

First of all, I note how the term "ridesharing" is already starting to drift into oblivion, just like the term "global warming," as slick new terminologies are invented to make corrupt government actions seem more legitimate.

I have to admit, I am awed by the cleverness of it all.

I quote:


The new Vehicle-for-Hire bylaw, in effect on July 15, 2016 will substantially change the city's approach to regulation within the ground transportation industry.

By creating the new Private Transportation Company (PTC) licensing category, companies such as Uber will be permitted to operate in Toronto, with regulation.

The new Vehicle-for-Hire bylaw:

  • regulates taxicabs, limousines and private transportation companies (PTCs)

  • focuses on public safety and consumer protection

  • ensures accessible vehicle-for-hire services

  • allows for increased competition and innovation


Let me go over these one-by-one.

- regulates taxicabs, limousines and private transportation companies (PTCs)

As I have said before, the terms "taxicab" and "personal transportation provider" represent the same thing. In collusion with Uber, the government has come up with two different names for the same service in order to disguise the massive crime that is being committed. I.E. allowing corporate political influence to create special laws for itself, thus guaranteeing huge profits. At the same time it completely obliterates the lifetime investments of the thousands of smaller owner/operators who lack the backing of companies like Goldman Sachs and Google, etc.

This brings to mind that quote attributed to Adolf Hitler,

"What good fortune for governments that the people do not think."

- focuses on public safety and consumer protection

Well, that is obviously a bald-faced lie. If the bylaw actually focused on public safety and consumer protection, they would have already banned the use of distractive devices for the purposes of taxicab dispatch, including Uber taxis.

If safety were something the politicians truly cared about, rather than paying hypocritical lip-service to, both Uber and the less politically connected taxi brokerages would have to switch back to the infinitely safer two-way radio dispatch system. What would Uber do then? Hand out free two-way radio handsets so their trendy customers could find matching drivers? Use smoke signals?

Far from being a "disruptive technology" the Uber dispatch interface is actually a very dangerous "distractive technology."

People have already died.

"According to the complaint filed in San Francisco Superior Court, Muzaffar was logged into the Uber app and monitoring his smartphone at or near the time he made the fatal turn. Christopher Dolan, the attorney representing the family, says the last thing the mother saw before being hit “was the driver looking down at his cell phone.

- ensures accessible vehicle-for-hire services

I don't know enough at this time about Uber's plans to provide accessible transportation to say much right now.

But I have not seen a single accessible Uber taxi on the streets of Hamilton so far. In fact, I have even noticed that the great proponent of 100% accessible taxi service in Hamilton, former religious leader, union leader, and mayoral candidate, the locally famous Ejaz Butt, is not driving an accessible Uber cab himself. For a man who boldly stated that "accessible transportation is a right, not a privilege!" this seems a bit disingenuous.

Then again, everything about Uber and the political classes that support it is disingenuous.

Finally this:

- allows for increased competition and innovation


What good fortune for governments, and the corporations that manipulate them, that the people do not think.

Superficially, it looks like a means to increased competition.

But this monstrosity is actually a revision of the taxicab bylaws (A.K.A. tilting the playing field that directly destroys the lifetime investments of the local taxi operators in order to guarantee the success of the predatory American company.

A blind man could see through this. Too bad he would still have trouble hailing an Uber cab. Especially if he has a service animal.

In the section of the bylaw revisions that Uber generously pre-wrote for the city of Toronto,

"A TNC shall provide passengers an opportunity (An opportunity!) to indicate whether they require a wheelchair accessible vehicle. If a TNC cannot(?) arrange wheelchair accessible service in any instance, it shall direct the passenger to an alternate provider of wheelchair-accessible service, if applicable."

In other words, if the provision of the guaranteed money-loser, accessible transportation, does not fit into Uber's business model, there is no reason it should be subjected to the same accessibility laws as every other business.

In other words, again, to put in terms the man in the street would understand, "If you want Uber to provide you with an accessible vehicle, FUCK OFF and call a taxi."

What got me off on this rant? It was something else, entirely. While gassing up last night, I overheard a guy who was sitting in his car at the station, talking on his phone. The part of the conversation I heard went llike this, "I am about five minutes away. Ok."

Then he left.

It was a conversation I have heard thousands of times. It's a cab driver promising to pick up one of his lock-ups. Usually for cash.

But it's getting late, so I will have to leave that avenue of thought for another time.

Thank you for reading. Please comment or share.


What are the Uber drivers saying today?

Waaaay too many drivers!! I haven't driven all week. Figured i would try tonight, start with beaches jazz festival that ends at 11pm. Sat in the middle of a good but brief surge, not a single ping. Watched it completely dissipate, then i get a close poo ping. Sorry i only take close and surged poo. Then got a select ping that was quickly cancelled by pax, so then started driving home, and didn't get another single ping. If uber has already cut off older vehicles, there are still too many drivers out there.

(emphasis mine)

Uhm, duh! Didn't anyone see this coming?


A Public Service Announcement from UBSDS


How much do you want to bet that I get a reply from a Hamilton councilor that says,

"Thank you for providing me feedback regarding Uber. I also believe we need to find practical ways to adapt to the technological advances in a changing taxi industry and have filed your message as background info to the Uber file. I look forward to seeing this evolve to the best possible outcome for residents and drivers."

I already have a small collection of these replies. They all say the same thing. This guy is plagiarizing himself.

Update: as of this morning, 24, July, 2016 I have not received another copy of this "reply." That means he must have read one of my emails and decided not to reply at all. At least that's more honest.

"Every decent man is ashamed of the government he lives under." -- H.L. Mencken.

Finally, when it comes to corruption, the Uber/Hamilton scam doesn't hold a candle to the stuff Hillary is involved in.

No comments:

Post a Comment

Please feel free to leave your comments, insults, or threats.

September 26, 2020

Hundreds of Mask Bylaw Complaints "The more you push toward negative outcomes, the more I think you antagonize groups...