The article does not compare or contrast the rates to other industries, situations or just living life in general. My comment is not to absolve Uber, but rather point out that the article does not do a good job at proving that Uber is any more dangerous than a variety of other places/activities/things.
Just take a cursory look at the front page, and see how much of it is hard, actual news. Even in the Business section, you'll find words like "cult-like" and "drowning in debt". It's very difficult to believe that this is a newspaper of record.
Uber is certainly not capable of dishing out the kind of punishment these scumbags deserve, nor is it capable of providing due process to defendants.
Uber's entire business model is, essentially, supplying unlicensed taxi services. I am honestly surprised it works as well as it does.
If anything, I would feel safer in an Uber than a taxi because there's a clear record of who is in that car.
At some level, they are attempting to avoid bad press, but their methods go far beyond "Washing our hands of it, not my problem" and into "Trying to obfuscate and cover up crimes so that we can't be tied to them".
Source: Worked at Uber for about six months and quit in disgust.
None of this is to exonerate the NYT for their biased reporting, because the crime rates in conventional taxes are almost as bad, and closure rates are worse. It's an ugly industry that Uber could have cleaned up but decided the pragmatic approach was to spin doctor.
mitchbob•16h ago