The cheap labor conservatives are really loving Uber.

I don't suppose any of their screeds about the economy includes one about how Uber wouldn't be expanding so much if it wasn't for the fact that most Americans, forced to own cars or they can't buy necessities or get to their jobs, are so desperate for money/work they're willing to give total strangers rides for a pittance?

Wouldn't really apply in NYC, where owning a car is an option if not an actual burden.
Seems like a reasonable alternative to a taxi monopoly that has often been plagued by scandals and scams.

If it weren't for the scandals, scams, tactics, and unrealistic bubble-esque growth Uber has projected, I might agree.

Ok, an autoplay video that's covered up by a sign-in wall because it's "for mature audiences"? You need a better link of that.

Not downmodding, but fuck Hulu. Please find somewhere else this is posted.

"this advertisement is unavailable at this time"

That's really something in this day and age. There are a great many sites where I'd love that to happen.

Not that I'm against advertising, since I like supporting sites I enjoy, but when three ads for cars I'll never buy begin autoplaying at once, it's a little much.

Sorry, currently our video library can only be watched from within the United States

I found a youtube of it, video src changed.

"Maybe the most tone-deaf political ad I've seen in NYC, and we dealt with AirBNB trying to defend itself as a job creator."

Want to explain? The only information I keep hearing about Uber is taxi drivers rioting in Europe trashing people's cars for *possibly* being Uber cars, tales of how the current taxi system is rent-seeking, etc. So if I see an ad claiming a political figure is being backed by taxi drivers to block competition it sounds believable.

The thing about Uber is that it takes all of the responsibility and liability of the taxi organization and pushes that onto the driver, while dictating rates and taking a hefty cut. It's a similar problem to how corporations will label employs "consultants" so as to not need to pay for benefits.

http://grist.org/business-technology/uber-lyft-and-the-growing-problem-of-temp-jobs/ is a decent run-down, and matches things I've heard from friends who drive for Uber.

Okay? But... why does that make this ad tone-deaf? If anything, it means that the city needs *more* competition (Lyft or other Uber clones) to mix it up and give drivers options, so they can find one that takes less of a cut, yes? Or it needs regulation that directly dictates how Uber should be dealing with their drivers, not a flat cap on the number of drivers in the city.

It needs competition that treats its employees like actual employees, making the company take on the responsibilities that entails instead of just reaping profits while it uses a legal fiction to avoid things like paying benefits or having some measure of responsibility for those it hires.

Uber, Lyft, etc. all run on a business model that's basically serfdom via smartphone.

Okay? But how does capping the maximum number of cars working for these companies help create that competition?

How does letting a company with such a crappy business model operate in the first place do any good for the economy?

A non-ideal job is still better than no job at all, and working for Uber is far superior to working as a McDonalds burger flipper. You didn't answer my question.

well, "minority neighborhoods" is not a great phrase, they're implying that a normal ambulance won't pick you up but they will, the places they name are mostly gentrified/mid-gentrification and not the actual "minority neighborhoods", if you want to serve the underserved you usually don't start with a pricey smartphone app and an English ad campaign.

No, they're not implying anything of the sort. They're saying an ambulance driver might have a hard time getting to work because taxis won't pick them up, while Uber and other car services offer a solution.

I honestly can't see how anyone misinterprets this ad as saying anything about ambulance services picking and choosing where they go.

Man, I actually got a push-poll against AirBnB last week. First time I've ever heard of one of those that wasn't for a political campaign. I don't like them but that made me annoyed enough to view AirBnB slightly better.