4 thoughts on “The public are wrong. A defence of ‘heartless’ surge-pricing”

  1. Posted 22/09/2016 at 08:00 | Permalink

    “People’s who actually found themselves in danger or most panicked, on the other hand, would be less likely to be influenced by the price – and so more likely to get a ride.”

    Surely this defeats your own arguement. This particular practice and in this particular incident resulted in those needing help having to pay more for it. It also meant that those poorer people in the same situation were discriminated against because of their economic situation. The reality is that Uber in using this system prioritises affluence at busier times and thus emphasises profit over people.

    Sure, everyone is allowed to make money but this article seems a weak excuse for profiteering to me.

  2. Posted 22/09/2016 at 20:11 | Permalink

    Steven M – did you read the article? You don’t seem to have grasped the point that movements in price have the effect of matching demand with supply – otherwise we get shortage or surplus.

  3. Posted 25/09/2016 at 10:11 | Permalink

    Steven M

    ‘Surely this defeats your own arguement. This particular practice and in this particular incident resulted in those needing help having to pay more for it.’

    As opposed to not getting a ride at all?

  4. Posted 26/09/2016 at 14:36 | Permalink

    I think a third major benefit can be identified. High prices encourage consumers to cooperate with each other to share costs; thus more people get rides even without additional supply of cars.

Leave a Reply

Your e-mail address will not be published.