At least the reputable ones. And this insurance will cover them for injuries and lost work.


It would seem appropriate to require this of Uber drivers and/or the contracting company.

The problem is from "ping" to pick up. Also I'd imagine a driver "cruising" pre-ping would get dropped if Allstate could prove that's what she's doing.

When I worked in sales, the company with which I contracted admitted no liability for injury incurred on the way to meetings, for instance. But if I'd been injured during a company function and/on company property, they'd have been on the hook for it.

The same would seem to apply here, no?

There are some grey areas, but if you are an independent contractor, you have to cover that yourself. It's like you are self employed.

You see it a lot. For example, there are nursing registries, where, as a nurse, you can take shifts at your discretion at different places and work when he/she wants rather than at a specific place for a specific shift.

So if it covered Uber it would have to cover these other things.

Barring some ad hoc insurance policy that would go into effect and be billable only while the roofer is on my roof, the cost would be outrageously prohibitive.


If the 1099 hair stylist stabs himself with scissors while he's cutting my hair, why should it be up to me to pay his workers' comp?

Sounds like a hundred million sweet handouts for the insurance providers.

Insurance always does well under progressive regulations.

Someone will object that the contractor will simply pass this cost onto the customer, and of course they will, but then the customer is paying a one-time charge for a service that they're getting, rather than a cost-in-perpetuity for a service they might not ever use.

And should be banned. It should only be allowed to exist if drivers are 1099 employees paid at least a minimum wage, including worker's comp, and any and all protections provided to a 1099 employee. Uber should pay all local taxes that local taxi companies pay, and be subject to all regulations local taxi companies must comply with.

I think DU doesn't quite get how medallion cabs work.

and trying to enforce laws against it would be hopeless.

How could such sales be banned in a free society? Trying to enforce laws against it would be hopeless.

who illegally sells alcohol and cigarettes, so adding another set of behaviors to those which we are already trying to enforce - we already have so many laws and there are only so many hours per day. Maybe if we legalized marijuana and other such drugs. There just seems to be a point where we have to realize legislation doesn't always solve a problem. Every car with more than one person in it could be engaging in the unlawful behavior.

and we've seen the screaming about the NSA - the ordinary government would have to have access to the internet to prevent it, I suppose.

Operating an unlicensed Ubermobile could result in heavy fines, voiding of car insurance policies, longterm loss of license and suspension of vehicle registration.

I'm not persuaded by the argument that the day is too short, because that reasoning could excuse a wide range of illegal activity.

them personally.

Medicaid for all= good because it helps me personally afford health care

Uber and AirB&B= good because it helps me personally get cheaper rides/rooms while screwing over legitimate businesses, local communities, local/state/federal tax revenues.

If Taxi services are so bad, then they need to reform and modernize their business model. Doing it via a Libertarian free-for-all is so screwed up it makes me barking mad.

Are you under the impression that cab companies are better to their drivers?

And why haven't they done so in the last, say, 30 years when taxis have with very very few exceptions become monstrously overpriced, hopelessly unreliable and with all the customer care of a DMV office?

" It's obvious now that DU'ers are only Progressive when it benefits them personally."

Wampus, did you conduct a survey of the entire DU membership to come to that striking conclusion?

Had to carry my own insurance and pay my own Social Security, taxes, etc.

As they cannot accept street hails, they are not "taxis".

Though I have been trying to learn. What I said was true for Philly, NYC, Atlanta, DC, Boston, SFO, and LA. You probably see a pattern there. I can't intelligently speak to Uber's impact anywhere but large coastal US cities (and large coastal Indian cities).

I wouldn't use Uber anywhere as they cut corners. A felon who used a vehicle in the commission of their felony, for example, can become an Uber driver as shown on CNN.

Maybe Chicago forbids felons from driving taxis, though.