back to article Drive for Lyft or Uber in SF? Your wallet is about to get lighter

The City of San Francisco will soon be requiring people who drive for ride-sharing services Lyft and Uber to have a business license. The city's Treasury Office said that it has begun notifying via mail drivers of transportation network companies (such as Uber and Lyft) that they have 30 days to obtain a license from the city …

  1. scrubber

    Fucking over-governance

    Hey there Peanuts kids, got a lemonade stand? That's $91 for every year you've been running it. Thanks.

    Hey Peanuts kids, nice legal business you got there. Now here's the health and safety certificates you need to obtain to sell food or drink to the public.

    We're from the government and we're here to help.

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: Fucking over-governance

      Neoliberalism is a meat grinder. You need those government regulations to stop corporations taking a shit in your mouth. Seriously, you'll miss them when they're gone.

      1. Preston Munchensonton
        FAIL

        Re: Fucking over-governance

        You need those government regulations to stop corporations taking a shit in your mouth.

        Absolutely. No licensed business has ever shit on its customers. Oh wait...

      2. scrubber

        Re: Fucking over-governance

        Dear AC, let me state this once again, you clearly missed the title first time: over-governance.

        Everyone wants somebody to be looking out for their interests (even paleo-libertarians believe a market in advice/recommendations would spring up to keep companies mostly honest) but there is a limit. Regulating kids' lemonade stands seems way, way over that limit.

        http://edition.cnn.com/2015/06/11/politics/lemonade-stand-shut-down-texas/index.html

        http://newyork.cbslocal.com/2012/03/19/bloomberg-strikes-again-nyc-bans-food-donations-to-the-homeless/

    2. Anonymous Coward
      Pint

      Re: Fucking over-governance

      Counterexample: Somalia.

      1. Paul 129
        Mushroom

        Re: Fucking over-governance

        "Counterexample: Somalia."

        You seem to thing governance is an either/or affair.

        May I suggest you take the same approach to other aspects of your life, water, salt, oxygen, advice.

        And people wonder why the world is in a shitty state at the moment!

        Working democracies are fragile, they need care and attention, effort and respect. From the citizens and the legislators.

        There are plenty of other types of governments out there.....

        I fear we'll be sampling them shortly

        1. JeffyPoooh
          Pint

          Re: Facking over-governance

          @Paul 129 "...an either/or affair."

          Offering Somalia as a SF alternative counterexample to exemplify Uber's explicitly professed worldview is sort-of like a 'reductio ad absurdum' rebuttal. I'm holding up Somalia as a mirror to Uber's entire business model. It's not me that's the 'either/or' extremist.

          In the context of Uber, the Somalia reference is perfectly fair. Uber explicitly wishes to operate free of any and all government regulation. On this point, they're indisputably extremists. They want extreme freedom. So they should move their HQ to downtown Mogadishu. It's a fair comment on *their* extreme worldview.

          Personally, I'm an 'Extremist Moderate' (i.e. not really extremist, except in moderation). By way of evidence, I appear to have invented the concept that the Left/Right Political Spectrum is actually bent into a circle, with indistinguishable L/R (who cares?) extremist spittle-laced loons on the far side. I believe it's a very illuminating idea.

          My next project is searching for the third axis of politics, to form a 3D sphere surface, or perhaps it's a 3D spherical volume. I suspect that the 3rd axis of politics will be an up/down intelligence scale where, again, the very clever consolidate into one indistinguishable point at the top, and the very dumb consolidate into another indistinguishable point at the bottom.

          Taking it further, perhaps these two Top/Bottom points narrow into thin tubes that join (internally or externally? Not clear...), making (overall) some sort of torus. The extremely clever and the extremely dumb are sometimes indistinguishable. Genius and lunacy are often adjacent.

          Anyway, sorry that my 'Somalia' post was too brief, and that it caused confusion about my views.

          PS. Did you notice my Somalia post was 'AC' with the Beer Bottle icon? Bug is apparently now fixed, due to responsible disclosure upon discovery.

          1. Paul 129

            Re: Facking over-governance

            @JeffyP... Thank you for your clarification. Unfortunately 'reducio ad absurdum' seems to be a governance style, and reporting style. It seems to resonate with the masses.

            I see it as a real problem.

            Solutions would be, better education in rhetoric, or just growing up and discuss the issues at hand fully. ;-)

          2. scrubber

            Re: Facking over-governance

            Several points to be made here, let's start with your 'discovery' - it is in fact more than a decade old view that the left/right line of politics is more accurately a horseshoe where the further you traverse towards either end of the spectrum the more alike they become:

            https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Horseshoe_theory

            (But I'm sure it's actually much older than that. I recall making a similar observation 20 years ago thinking about the similarities between fascism and communism)

            As for your multi-dimensional political view, there is already a much better political compass that separates out the economic freedom from personal/social freedom:https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Political_compass

            Now just because Uber don't want regulation in one particular market segment does not mean they don't want regulation in any segment, e.g. if cars are allowed on the road, untaxed and uninsured, with no traffic rules and regulations then people are less likely to use Uber (drivers and passengers) because the roads would be incredibly unsafe - this is NOT what Uber would want. They likely also quite like the regulation of the financial markets that enables them to get such large sums of money to cripple the opposition continue growing their business.

            As for "Somalia", what makes you think there is no regulation there? It is about as over-regulated as it gets. Men with guns come and ensure you are doing things they like and take your money, then other men with guns come to ensure you're doing something different and take your money. Just because there is no coordination between the groups with guns does not make you 'free' from regulation.

            And all these western clowns who keep going on about how great government regulation is and how restaurants would poison you every chance they had without some bureaucrat with a clipboard form the local council coming down and taking bribes every other month, where the hell do you eat and stay when you're on holiday? The bloke with the clipboard doesn't go to Mexico or the Canaries ahead of you to check that restaurant or hotel in advance of your arrival, so it seems the world does actually manage to function without poisoning everyone without the bloke from your local council checking standards.

            Speaking of which, when you're abroad how do you decide which restaurants/hotels are clean? You use tripadvisor or some non-government site that collates customer reviews. But that would never work here, right? We definitely need the bloke with the clipboard who earns bugger all and definitely can't be bribed, amirite?

      2. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: Fucking over-governance

        Counter counter example: The soviet union (if you want to play that game). On the other hand, if you do google a bit abou somalia, there are reports about decreasing infant mortality rates based in non-government initiatives, and then, turning for the wose, once the "government" starts to step in to regulate things.

        What happened when the "government" stepped in, is that nepotism once again flourished, causing destabilization since certain ethnicity groups benefitted at the expense of others.

        So without the state, somalia actually started to flourish in certain areas, and once a state was established, any progress stopped.

  2. Herby

    But I thought...

    That those who do the work for Uber and Lyft are employees of same (at least that what was argued in court a while ago). If that is the case, only Uber and Lyft need get once license each, and I suspect that the $91 is "pocket change" to them.

    Sorry SF, can't have it both ways!

    (lemonade stands not withstanding)

    1. Velv

      Re: But I thought...

      Uber maintains the stance that drivers are "independent contractors" despite having lost a couple of cases over a few named "employees".

      So while SF "can't have it both ways", neither can Uber, Lyft, or any other business

  3. kain preacher

    This is SF. The city were you need a permit to install a garage opener.

    1. Gray
      Angel

      Not only SF, but virtually every city of any size in America. That garage door opener? Registered & certified with attached compliance sticker. The opener mechanism? Inspected & certified, with safety instructions attached. Electrical source? Installed by certified electrician, installation inspected under city building permit & code certifications. The overall door opening installation, another city building permit, licensed contractor installed, city inspection certificate permanently displayed on wall. Annual variance permit issued for "historical district" waiver to allow electro-mechanical device operation. FCC compliance certificate issued under condition of operational compliance with device operations manual. One-week on-line training course for hand-held radio frequency transmitter. Annual renewal of operator's license upon payment of mandated fee.

      Feel free to enjoy your precious liberty & hard-won American freedoms!

      1. jake Silver badge

        @Gray

        Horse hockey.

        I've put in my own such "system upgrades" for years here in Sonoma, not 35 miles north-north-east of San Francisco. No permits required. And in Palo Alto before that.

        It's TheCity&County looking to fill the coffers, in such cases. This is most of the reason that your typical one-bed, one-bath flat in an aging decrepit converted Victorian four-plex costs more to rent per month than actually purchasing a home and paying the mortgage not 25 miles from San Francisco.

        Yes, my insurance company inspects my new installs (I insist on it!). No issues to date.

        1. kain preacher

          Re: @Gray

          Jake is right on this one. Most cities in California do not require this.

        2. Malcolm Weir Silver badge

          Re: @Gray

          @jake,

          Don't speak nonsense: fees represent approximately 0.000001% of the reason why SF rents are higher than somewhere rather more than an hour away from the city. The real reason is supply and demand, in nice capitalist thinking. If your thesis were even remotely true, then you could explain why sales tax is lower in San Francisco than in San Mateo and Alameda counties (over 1% lower than the latter, as it happens). And while you need a permit in SF for a door opener, you also need one in the adjacent Daly City, so there goes that particular "fees lead to high rent" argument!

          1. jake Silver badge

            @Malcolm Weir (was:Re: @Gray)

            "The real reason is supply and demand"

            Absolutely! There is zero supply chain (no room to make more space in SF's 49sq miles), thus allowing the owners and TheCity&County to demand as much as they can get away with from idiots who can't do math(s). Sales tax has absolutely zero to do with this conversation ...

            "fees represent approximately 0.000001% of the reason why SF rents are higher than somewhere rather more than an hour away from the city."

            One wonders where, exactly, you came up with that nonsensical percentage?

      2. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Not only SF, but virtually every city of any size in America. That garage door opener? Registered & certified with attached compliance sticker. (etc)

        The obvious solution (and gap in the market) is thus creating a garage door you need to shoot at. From what I understand of US gun law that ought to be much easier to license...

        1. This post has been deleted by its author

          1. Preston Munchensonton

            The potential demand is huge in the more Southern states.

            You think so, because you overestimate how attached people are to shooting guns and not nearly understanding enough of how much people love pressing buttons. Try taking their remote controls away to see how quickly the rioting would begin.

            1. jake Silver badge

              @ Preston Munchensonton

              "Try taking their remote controls away to see how quickly the rioting would begin."

              Now, THOSEpeople wouldn't riot ... they would drop to the floor, quivering.

          2. jake Silver badge

            @Voyna i Mor, Re: "Gun controlled garage door"

            "The potential demand is huge in the more Southern states."

            Do you really think the rednecks want to shoot up their own garages?

            I kinda suspect your preconceived opinion doesn't match reality.

      3. H in The Hague

        Hmmm, perhaps time you moved to The Hague, the Netherlands, Europe. No permit needed for your garage door opener, no need for a certified electrician or inspection. Any opener you buy should be CE compliant so you can install it anywhere in Europe. Admittedly making a hole in the facade of your house in a historical district will require planning permission. Interesting to see how there's sometimes less red tape in old Europe than the supposedly freeer US.

        1. Anonymous Coward
          Anonymous Coward

          "...supposedly freer US."

          The '$5 Freedom Test' - based on the 'Your Dirty Mind' method.

          Eat a double-patty cheeseburger, in a crowded public place, while holding it turned 90° from normal (held vertically).

          Eating a double-patty cheeseburger held vertically is a crime precisely nowhere on Earth. If you get to sleep in your own bed that night, then you live in true freedom. But if you wake up in a cold jail cell, body riddled with electroshock wounds, then you're actually in an intolerant police state; no matter what anything else says.

          This '$5 Freedom Test' can be done safely as a thought experiment. The results are often perfectly predictable.

          1. Anonymous Coward
            Anonymous Coward

            Re: "...supposedly freer US."

            I think I'll stick to trying to promote Pastafarianism, I think. Less messy, and there has already been a wedding in NZ under that religion which creates entertaining problems for those dismissing us so brutally as parody..

            :)

  4. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    What does the licence do?

    Does it just certify that those who hold it can pay $91/year? In which case it's just extortion. Like the Bristol Park Run --- it just local government saying, hey look, we can have a bit of that revenue ...

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: What does the licence do?

      Ah the Bristol Park Run, a story I have been following.

      They asked for the not-for-profit registered company (paid directors, fundraisers and sponsors) to apply for a community "Grant" for the upkeep of the park, which they refused.

      I really don't see what the problem is with that unless the company already gets the grant but doesn't pass it on.

      https://www.parkrun.org.uk/sponsors/

      Where does the sponsor money go? How much do the sponsors pay?

      The runs are free and run by volunteers in free public spaces with a small outlay of running a website and managing a database (which is probably sold as well) plus the bar code scanners.

      Don't get me wrong I don't agree with charging runners but in this instance they are not charging runners as they are free to run in the park whenever they want just not under an organisation that I think isn't being totally open and the press slant on it is a quite a bit biased if you ask me.

      1. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: What does the licence do?

        One important point ... Stoke Gifford is in South Gloucestershire and not part of the Bristol City ... only about half of the overall "Bristol" urban area is actual Bristol and relations between Bristol and all its neighbouring authorities are at times strained (one of the reasons that despite 20+ years of discussion we still don't have the much discussed tram system) so I suspect that there was some degree of "look at all these people coming in from Bristol to use our facilities" involved (I live in Bristol and am training for the upcoming Bristol 10k and people had recommended the Stoke Gifford parkrun as "its flat"). Also, I gather the fee idea only rose after the other sports clubs who pay to use the playing fields started to ask why another organisation was being given a weekly "freebie" and behind this there may have been some concern that could be some legal review of the different treatment of different organisations.

        1. David Webb

          Re: What does the licence do?

          Off topic but I thought running on flat ground wasn't as good as more varied courses, small hills etc, as that will put a little less stress on your legs and also help to build them up properly? One of the reasons cited recently for why treadmills were not such a good idea, the "course" is flat and could actually lead to injury, whereas a varied course might make you a little more tired but is better for you.

      2. John H Woods Silver badge

        Re: What does the licence do?

        Hi there, I've read up about this and changed my mind about Bristol Park Run, because the money is actually *for* something, i.e. grounds upkeep - I should have thought of that. But I'm still not sure what the $91/year for uber/lyft drivers is for ... just that the park run isn't a good analogy

        1. skwdenyer

          Re: What does the licence do?

          My personal beef with the park ruling is this: according to the Parish Council it is "unfair to expect non-running residents to pay for path maintenance."

          Let's think about that for a moment in the context of a different example. Only 2% (at most) of the population use wheelchairs: it is "unfair" for the remaining 98% to pay for drop kerbs and the like - we must levy wheelchair users.

          Governments (large or small) operate on the basis that they provide services which, whilst not used by everybody, are available to many/most and benefit society.

          The Parish Council provides a park. A small (and, yes, it really is only a small) number of people are now regularly running in the park. The promotion of exercise is in the public interest - in fact, it is likely the only reason why there is suddenly a concern over "wear and tear" is because the residents of Little Stuck are too f****ing lazy to run the rest of the time.

          The Parish Council have decided that it is not their public duty to provide a park for people to exercise in. What next - individual joggers getting levied? Mothers with babys? After all, it is "unfair" to expect those not using the park to pay for those who are...

          ...oh, wait, that would be exactly the point of centralised provision of recreational facilities...

  5. JeffyPoooh
    Pint

    "...run the risk of additional fines if caught."

    "If..."?

    You know that 'There's an App for that' ?

    Scroll through Uber app, select the next rule-breaker. Beckon them over.

    Note: The Business Licence obviously needs to include the 'Doing Business As...' field, with the Driver's Uber ID filled in. Then it's trivial to enforce the rules, enforced by reference to the app itself.

  6. a_yank_lurker

    Correct Legal Status

    This could turn the correct legal status of Uber & Lyft drivers under California and feral labor laws. The question is how are the drivers' defined in the law. They may defined as a contractor not a business.

    1. Preston Munchensonton
      Thumb Up

      Re: Correct Legal Status

      This is precisely the problem. If California defines ride-sharing drivers as employees, then these drivers are covered by the business licenses obtained by their employers. Of course, this logic enfuriates lefties, who think that no one can possibly be up to any good on their own without a law and license to cover it.

      The purpose of a business license is to provide corporate taxation, not to safeguard the businesses' customers. One of many barriers to entry that crony capitalists love to erect to prevent competition.

      1. Steve Davies 3 Silver badge

        Re: Correct Legal Status

        Does this mean the end of 'Car-pooling' and the lanes reserved for them to be eradicated?

        During my time living in the USA, I found the local politicicans totally moronic and just small time versions of their Congress critter heroes.

        For example,

        A Shopping Mall was built (in error) with one 5ft section in another state. This second state wanted to charge their sales tax on everything sold in the Mall. This state had a much higher sales tax then the first state (1% at the time). The Mall operators simply got a backhoe (JCB for us in Blighty) and demolished the bit of the building that dared venture into the other state.

        The whole thing about permits for this and permits for that, permits to breathe, permits to live is frankly a blight on the US idea of freedom. We are lucky here in 'the old country'. Some of the people I know in the US would rather like the idea of their state leaving the Union and coming back into the UK fold.

        Frying pan into the fire but it does show the how pissed off many citizens are with all levels of Government in the USA.

      2. JeffyPoooh
        Pint

        Re: Correct Legal Status

        @Preston M

        I think that you've just accused one group (those in favour of the regulation of Uber and their drivers) of simultaneously being both 'infuriated lefties' and 'crony capitalists'.

  7. Josh Cain

    One thing that seems to be constantly overlooked...

    Every one of those Lyft/Uber drivers has PERSONAL car insurance. If they are driving people around and get in an accident, both driver and passenger(s) are likely to be left high and dry because they didn't have commercial coverage. Look into the blanket insurance policies cab companies have to cover liability, then compare it to these "ride sharing" businesses. As contract workers they have to provide their own coverage.

    Next time you hop into your Lyft/Uber ride, dwell on that, and wonder if that was the smell of alcohol on your drivers breath.

    1. Fatman

      Re: One thing that seems to be constantly overlooked...

      I live in the "wonderful" state of Flori-DUH!!

      As I have used licensed cabs quite a bit in recent years, and NOT either Uber or Lyft; it is due to the insurance issue. With a licensed cab, I KNOW whose insurance coverage will 'take the hit' if I get injured in an accident. AIUI, Uber and Lyft call for any claim to be filed against the driver's insurance company FIRST, and, then ONLY IF the driver's insurance company refuses to pay, will their policy even consider the claim.

      One thing I recall from my private passenger insurance policy was a restriction on FOR HIRE coverage. And I would expect the insurance companies that insure the vehicles used by Uber and Lyft's drivers to have similar clauses.

      ANY ONE for consumer protection??? I can't wait for the local shysters to include "being injured in an accident with a 'ride share' driver" to their spiels.

POST COMMENT House rules

Not a member of The Register? Create a new account here.

  • Enter your comment

  • Add an icon

Anonymous cowards cannot choose their icon

Other stories you might like