Gregory's Server@not2b
Sounds like they need to buy or rent some spaces then. And it also seems like driving around is too cheap.
@Chip_Unicorn @docpop
|
5 comments
@Itty53 And the city should just charge per mile driven, regardless of who is driving and how many passengers. Bigger car=more expensive. More passengers means more customers to share the cost over, so it works out. Use the income to fund public transport and generally infrastructure for non-car, low-impact mobility. @kyrsjo @not2b @Chip_Unicorn @docpop There's another angle here you touched on: there's no labor being gained by the city. No employees being made. When businesses operate that's the implicit deal, they are providing jobs. So the city should consider that as well. Labor is usually over half the operation overhead right? Take half their profits and put it toward the city government. Or don't do business with them.  @Itty53 @kyrsjo @not2b @Chip_Unicorn @docpop That is always the issue with big corporations. The relationship to the city is extraction based, they take more out of the local economy than they put back in |
@kyrsjo @not2b @Chip_Unicorn @docpop
The second thing. Yup. City should start charging them per mile driven without a passenger. Enough to make it a profit loss. They'll complain there's nowhere to park and the response should be "not our problem". Force them to create a more acceptable business model or don't have a business.