
Pittsburgh has finally realized it’s in a toxic relationship with Uber - fmihaila
https://qz.com/904744/pittsburgh-officials-are-criticizing-ubers-one-way-relationship-with-the-city/
======
PeterisP
So, the city is asking a company to pay extra money in addition to the normal
taxes, and if they decline, that's called "a toxic relationship" ?

The main purpose of a municipality is to provide infrastructure that's
convenient for people and businesses in it, in that context the things Uber
asked (according to the article) seem reasonable - it's also reasonable to not
provide what a single company asks because/if there are other priorities, but
it certainly is reasonable to ask them.

Not offering to fund it yourself isn't a sign of an one-sided relationship -
the company is providing direct taxes through sales and indirect taxes through
jobs, and it's reasonable to expect proper infrastructure in return.

~~~
Eridrus
Uber has also gotten political cover, which is usually what you need to pay
extra for. They don't have it in Seattle and are ending up fighting a local
ordinance letting their regular drivers vote on whether all Uber drivers need
to be union members in court.

If you're as big as Uber, paying your taxes is not enough, you need to show
that you are a positive contributor to society so that society decides it
shouldn't regulate you out of existence.

~~~
thomasthomas
_If you 're as big as Uber, paying your taxes is not enough, you need to show
that you are a positive contributor to society so that society decides it
shouldn't regulate you out of existence._

what theory of economics is this i'm not familiar.

if you are a big company that means customers show every day with their
wallets that they value the company unless some govt regulation is restricting
competition.

~~~
toomuchtodo
Too bad customers aren't always voters. Voters are the ones who count.

------
Isamu
>After bending over backward to accommodate the ride-sharing company’s
driverless car ambitions, city officials are tired of being taken for granted.

>Pittsburgh wrote a letter in support of Uber when the company was fined $11.4
million for operating in Pennsylvania without permission.

>Pittsburgh opened its streets to tests of self-driving cars with real people,
and played along with Uber’s hasty and elaborate press event.

>Peduto asked Uber to spend $25 million on a new transit connection

So the local govt "bending over backward" is that they "wrote a letter" and
allowed use of streets. In return they wanted a $25M project. Ok.

>On Feb. 4, protestors marched on the Advanced Technologies Center in
Pittsburgh’s Strip District, decrying the company’s “one-way” partnership with
workers.

Ah, I think this is the heart of the matter. Mayor Peduto wants to seem
supportive of the protesters.

