Skip to main content

Society Needs Uber - Not Just for Rides.

When you get in a mini cab, don't just sit there looking at your phone. Chat to the driver! He or she has a story you need to hear as you make your way to a warm home in the suburbs, an expensive restaurant, the theatre or a concert... which your drivers and their families can only ever dream about. It's not only courtesy to respect them as humans rather than vehicle accessories, it's an opportunity to learn about other countries, other cultures and to take a glimpse into what it's like to be a 'have not'. It's about respect and empathy.

By banning Uber from London, its socialist mayor, Sadiq Khan, is ironically removing one of the most powerful opportunities for privileged classes to meet and get to know, albeit briefly, the very people he is dedicated to helping. When else do we have the opportunity to hear their stories? We're trapped in a metal box for up to an hour or so. Instead of rudely ignoring them, we should be finding out why they're mini cab drivers. Indeed I'm often told that my Pakistani, Syrian or Kurdish driver is a lawyer, an accountant, a writer or an engineer. Usually they have young families struggling to survive thousands of miles away without their father (usually). 

I'm not being patronising. I'm respectful and genuinely interested in meeting people who come from places and cultures that are different from me - unlike Black Cab drivers who support our football or rugby teams, have similar opinions about the royal family, Brexit and TV box sets, and sing the same national anthem. Their children are all being educated to a greater or lesser extent, they use the same NHS as us, and we sit next to them on Easyjet and Ryan Air. 

And by asking them questions, you're engaging with another human. You're breaking down barriers of mistrust and you're learning something.

Sadiq Khan is a member of the socialist Labour party. He's also the mayor of London. Over the years he's been battling against Uber in his city. The main issues seem to be the safety of passengers, pollution from increased traffic, and the erosion of the established, and much cherished, London black cab business. Last month, London, for the second time, cancelled Uber's license to operate in the capital. 

The number of licensed private hire drivers in London has almost doubled in less than a decade, from 59,000 in 2009-10 to 114,000 in 2017-18, while the number of black-cab drivers has fallen from 25,000 to just under 24,000. About 45,000 drivers work for Uber in the capital - that's nearly half of them. Khan said drivers’ livelihoods had also been affected by the rise in numbers. He added that “the huge increase in private hire drivers on London’s roads in recent years is causing increased congestion, polluting our air and leaving many drivers struggling to make enough money to support themselves and their families”.

This may all be true. But losing Uber from the UK's capital will remove a vital opportunity to promote socialist principles. It offers one of the few times that privileged British people get to talk to people struggling to survive and who are often immigrants refuges.

When you get into an Uber, you already know the driver's name (it's part of the app). "Good evening Ahmed. How are you?". You are locked in a metal box with them for several minutes. Talk to them! Ask them where they're from and what their story is. I've heard amazing tales from Kurds, Pakistanis, Iranians, Syrians as well as people from other parts of the UK who can't afford to take cabs themselves.

It's ironic that a socialist mayor is trying to prevent us from one of the most effective ways we have of personally exposing us to learning a little more about what life is like on the other side of the tracks. Uber is more than a business. It's a massive social education program that's literally comes to our door.


Popular posts from this blog

Phillips screws - yes I'm angry about them too

Don't get me wrong. They're a brilliant invention to assist automation and prevent screwdrivers from slipping off screw heads - damaging furniture, paintwork and fingers in the process. Interestingly they weren't invented by Mr Phillips at all, but by a John P Thompson who sold Mr P the idea after failing to commercialise it. Mr P, on the otherhand, quickly succeeded where Mr T had failed. Incredible isn't it. You don't just need a good idea, you need a great salesman and, more importantly, perfect timing to make a success out of something new. Actually, it would seem, he did two clever things (apart from buying the rights). He gave the invention to GM to trial. No-brainer #1. After it was adopted by the great GM, instead of trying to become their sole supplier of Phillips screws, he sold licenses to every other screw manufacturer in the world. A little of a lot is worth a great deal more than a lot of a little + vulnerability (watch out Apple!). My gromble is abo

Would we pay more for their stuff?

I'm confused. Brexiters argue the Germans, Italians and French will still want to sell us their cars, so continued free trade with the UK is in their best interests. But we'll have to negotiate this (with an EU unwilling to make leaving easy) by threatening to make their cars more expensive for British people to buy. We'll do this because WE need to make imports more expensive to try to restore our balance of payments. Are Brits prepared to pay more for their Audis, Fiats and Renaults in order to make British cars more appealing, or do Brexiters want to pay more in order to punish them for taxing our insurance and banking products? Either way, imports will cost more. While in the EU, we buy their cars because we like the choice and don't want our own government to tax them. Indeed it would be better for British car manufacturing if we went back to the good old days of being encouraged to buy cheaper British cars (made by foreign owned factories). Is that what Brexite

Addictions. Porn, Drugs, Alcohol and Sex. Don't prevent it, make it safer.

In 1926 New York, during Prohibition, 1,200 people were poisoned by whiskey containing small quantities of wood alcohol (methanol). Around 400 died, the rest were blinded. The methanol they drank was in the moonshine they had bought illegally. In fact it had been added by law to industrial ethanol in order to make it undrinkable. Prohibition existed to protect everyone from the 'evils of the demon drink'. However, people still wanted to enjoy alcohol. So bootleggers bought cheap industrial alcohol and attempted to distill it to remove the impurities the state had added, but the process wasn't regulated. The state was inadvertently responsible for the suffering - although it was easy for them to blame the bootleggers and to justify escalating the war. This didn't stop the bootleggers. In fact it forced them to become more violent to protect their operations, and even less cautious about their production standards. Volumes of illicit alcohol, and therefore proportionat