So it appears there’s a huge dearth of critical thinking in Austin, Texas. There was a vote today on proposition 1 which was attempting to repeal the Austin City Council’s requirement that ride sharing companies like Uber and Lyft do extensive background checks on their drivers.
On the surface this might seem ok. After all, if Uber does more background checks, Uber passengers will be safer, right? Wrong. Uber drivers collectively conduct 1 million trips every day around the world. If Uber had 100 assaults each day it would be an epidemic that would put them out of business and yet your odds of being attached would then be 1 in 10,000. You are almost certainly far more likely to die in a car accident while riding in an Uber car than to be attacked by an Uber driver. For example, your odds of dying in a car accident are about 1 in 100. It should be needless to say that using Uber is very safe. Nothing is completely safe of course. People die in their sleep every year by being strangled to death by their sheets but that doesn’t keep us awake at night.
Let’s say you are a violent person out there looking for the best way to find your next victim. You could choose to simply find people who are home alone, break-in and assault them. If you’re smart, you’ll wear a mask and gloves so you leave little or no evidence behind. Instead, you decide to use Uber to find your next victim. Never mind the fact that everything about your transaction (your name, address, photos of your driver’s license and insurance as well as detailed photos of your car, the passengers name and address, as well as when you accepted the trip, when and where it started, the destination, the time it began and more) will all be tucked securely away on a server of which you have no access. The evidence supporting the victim’s claim that they were assaulted by you will be overwhelming. You’d have to be the stupidest person in the world to think that attacking your passenger is a good idea.
So the city council first wasted tax payer dollars coming up with this ridiculous idea in the first place then Uber has had to waste their time and money trying to fight it. Finally, the ignorant voters, only a tiny percentage of which bothered to vote, came out against the proposition. Worst of all is that the people already have a choice. If you think Uber is dangerous don’t use it.
Now Uber and Lyft will abandon the Austin market all because some ignorant city council members couldn’t be bothered to do a little critical thinking before wasting taxpayer dollars to stifle a valuable service. For those that think Uber is bluffing, they have already announced they are pulling out of Austin effective Monday morning and they have done this before in other cities. If it’s happening in a high-tech city like Austin, Texas with an very educated population, it can happen where you live as well.
Folks, we need more critical thinking. We all need to use common sense, do a little more research and spend a little more time considering our decisions before just reacting to every little headline that comes along. We should all know by now that the media is NOT aligned with our best interests. Their job is to create juicy headlines so you’ll see the ads that make them money. The next time you are outraged by a headline on Facebook or Twitter, spend an extra minute or so to determine if it makes any sense before clicking that Share button. You’ll be the better for it and you’ll be providing a valuable service by not spreading the news equivalent of cow manure.
In this world of instant 24/7 news and social media that can spread a story at nearly the speed of light, it takes an extra level of vigilance and critical thinking to be part of the solution rather than part of the problem.
Update (5/11/16): In 2015 The Austin Police Department received 7 reports of alleged sexual assaults committed by Uber/Lyft drivers. What percentage of all fares does this represent? I’ve read there are about 5000 Uber/Lfyt drivers. Let’s assume the average driver handles only 2 fares a day to account for the many drivers that only occasionally drive. That’s 3.65 million fares a year. Divide the 7 assaults by 3.65 million and you get just under two millionths of one percent. That’s a microscopic number. This does not seem like a problem worth solving with tax payer dollars. Note that almost all if not all of those reports were made by young, drunk women. While these women certainly deserve to be able to get home without being assaulted, this problem is actually too small to be worth addressing with tax payer dollars. I don’t wish to be insensitive but we wouldn’t be willing to spend $7 million dollars to stop 7 alleged assaults, right? That means there must be a cost-benefit analysis there’s just no way the cost-benefit analysis works here. Uber knows this. They know that in a few months the Uber users will pitch a fit, the City Council will make the background checks optional and Uber will return.