# Uber banned in London



## Tommy Tainant

Uber deserved to lose its licence – Londoners’ safety must come first | Sadiq Khan

Safety concerns.


----------



## gipper

Because those taxi drivers are so much safer.  

LMFAO.  

Yet another example of big government corruption and you support it.


----------



## Weatherman2020

Tommy Tainant said:


> Uber deserved to lose its licence – Londoners’ safety must come first | Sadiq Khan
> 
> Safety concerns.


“Health and safety” is the plea for every infringement of human freedom in Britain today – it is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves.


----------



## EvilCat Breath

gipper said:


> Because those taxi drivers are so much safer.
> 
> LMFAO.
> 
> Yet another example of big government corruption and you support it.


Evidently, yes the taxis are safer. That's why uber is banned and not taxis.


----------



## Wyatt earp

Tipsycatlover said:


> gipper said:
> 
> 
> 
> Because those taxi drivers are so much safer.
> 
> LMFAO.
> 
> Yet another example of big government corruption and you support it.
> 
> 
> 
> Evidently, yes the taxis are safer. That's why uber is banned and not taxis.
Click to expand...



Safer and easier to tax then uber drivers maybe


----------



## Weatherman2020

bear513 said:


> Tipsycatlover said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> gipper said:
> 
> 
> 
> Because those taxi drivers are so much safer.
> 
> LMFAO.
> 
> Yet another example of big government corruption and you support it.
> 
> 
> 
> Evidently, yes the taxis are safer. That's why uber is banned and not taxis.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Safer and easier to tax then uber drivers maybe
Click to expand...

How dare the Little People attempt to make money using their own ambition!


----------



## BulletProof

This seems to be nothing but a case of @ssholes in government.


----------



## Death Angel

Tommy Tainant said:


> Uber deserved to lose its licence – Londoners’ safety must come first | Sadiq Khan
> 
> Safety concerns.


Yet you welcome the rapists into your dying country.


----------



## Tommy Tainant

Wow, the chimps are all out tonight.

I am far from being a defender of the London cabbie.

But they do have to be registered and pass certain checks before they are licensed.

Its a basic thing that is done.

So we can weed out the paedos,murderers and rapists.

I think even you nutters can agree that is a GOOD THING.

Uber are not fulfilling their duties in this respect. Neither are they being honest in reporting accidents.

Now, take a deep breath you thick fuckers, please explain how this decision is anything other than a correct decision that will protect the public.

When my kids are catching rides home I like to think that the driver is not a convicted pervert. Im sort of funny that way.


----------



## gipper

Tommy Tainant said:


> Wow, the chimps are all out tonight.
> 
> I am far from being a defender of the London cabbie.
> 
> But they do have to be registered and pass certain checks before they are licensed.
> 
> Its a basic thing that is done.
> 
> So we can weed out the paedos,murderers and rapists.
> 
> I think even you nutters can agree that is a GOOD THING.
> 
> Uber are not fulfilling their duties in this respect. Neither are they being honest in reporting accidents.
> 
> Now, take a deep breath you thick fuckers, please explain how this decision is anything other than a correct decision that will protect the public.
> 
> When my kids are catching rides home I like to think that the driver is not a convicted pervert. Im sort of funny that way.


In other words, you love corrupt big government.  

Can't fix stupid.


----------



## Tommy Tainant

gipper said:


> Tommy Tainant said:
> 
> 
> 
> Wow, the chimps are all out tonight.
> 
> I am far from being a defender of the London cabbie.
> 
> But they do have to be registered and pass certain checks before they are licensed.
> 
> Its a basic thing that is done.
> 
> So we can weed out the paedos,murderers and rapists.
> 
> I think even you nutters can agree that is a GOOD THING.
> 
> Uber are not fulfilling their duties in this respect. Neither are they being honest in reporting accidents.
> 
> Now, take a deep breath you thick fuckers, please explain how this decision is anything other than a correct decision that will protect the public.
> 
> When my kids are catching rides home I like to think that the driver is not a convicted pervert. Im sort of funny that way.
> 
> 
> 
> In other words, you love corrupt big government.
> 
> Can't fix stupid.
Click to expand...

In other words you want paedos and rapists driving kids around.
Tidy !!


----------



## Wyatt earp

Tommy Tainant said:


> Wow, the chimps are all out tonight.
> 
> I am far from being a defender of the London cabbie.
> 
> But they do have to be registered and pass certain checks before they are licensed.
> 
> Its a basic thing that is done.
> 
> So we can weed out the paedos,murderers and rapists.
> 
> I think even you nutters can agree that is a GOOD THING.
> 
> Uber are not fulfilling their duties in this respect. Neither are they being honest in reporting accidents.
> 
> Now, take a deep breath you thick fuckers, please explain how this decision is anything other than a correct decision that will protect the public.
> 
> When my kids are catching rides home I like to think that the driver is not a convicted pervert. Im sort of funny that way.




Do you have proof of those allegation? I have not been reading any newstorys of uber drivers doing anything criminal..


----------



## gipper

Tommy Tainant said:


> gipper said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Tommy Tainant said:
> 
> 
> 
> Wow, the chimps are all out tonight.
> 
> I am far from being a defender of the London cabbie.
> 
> But they do have to be registered and pass certain checks before they are licensed.
> 
> Its a basic thing that is done.
> 
> So we can weed out the paedos,murderers and rapists.
> 
> I think even you nutters can agree that is a GOOD THING.
> 
> Uber are not fulfilling their duties in this respect. Neither are they being honest in reporting accidents.
> 
> Now, take a deep breath you thick fuckers, please explain how this decision is anything other than a correct decision that will protect the public.
> 
> When my kids are catching rides home I like to think that the driver is not a convicted pervert. Im sort of funny that way.
> 
> 
> 
> In other words, you love corrupt big government.
> 
> Can't fix stupid.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> In other words you want paedos and rapists driving kids around.
> Tidy !!
Click to expand...

Dumb as usual. 

You really think taxi drivers are different?   Dumb ass.  

This is about government making money, but dupes can't see it even though it is clear as day.


----------



## Tommy Tainant

bear513 said:


> Tommy Tainant said:
> 
> 
> 
> Wow, the chimps are all out tonight.
> 
> I am far from being a defender of the London cabbie.
> 
> But they do have to be registered and pass certain checks before they are licensed.
> 
> Its a basic thing that is done.
> 
> So we can weed out the paedos,murderers and rapists.
> 
> I think even you nutters can agree that is a GOOD THING.
> 
> Uber are not fulfilling their duties in this respect. Neither are they being honest in reporting accidents.
> 
> Now, take a deep breath you thick fuckers, please explain how this decision is anything other than a correct decision that will protect the public.
> 
> When my kids are catching rides home I like to think that the driver is not a convicted pervert. Im sort of funny that way.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Do you have proof of those allegation? I have not been reading any newstorys of uber drivers doing anything criminal..
Click to expand...

Or you could read the article. They are appealing so I think we will all see the evidence very soon. Of course Uber could be a responsible corporation and this would go away.


----------



## Tommy Tainant

gipper said:


> Tommy Tainant said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> gipper said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Tommy Tainant said:
> 
> 
> 
> Wow, the chimps are all out tonight.
> 
> I am far from being a defender of the London cabbie.
> 
> But they do have to be registered and pass certain checks before they are licensed.
> 
> Its a basic thing that is done.
> 
> So we can weed out the paedos,murderers and rapists.
> 
> I think even you nutters can agree that is a GOOD THING.
> 
> Uber are not fulfilling their duties in this respect. Neither are they being honest in reporting accidents.
> 
> Now, take a deep breath you thick fuckers, please explain how this decision is anything other than a correct decision that will protect the public.
> 
> When my kids are catching rides home I like to think that the driver is not a convicted pervert. Im sort of funny that way.
> 
> 
> 
> In other words, you love corrupt big government.
> 
> Can't fix stupid.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> In other words you want paedos and rapists driving kids around.
> Tidy !!
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Dumb as usual.
> 
> You really think taxi drivers are different?   Dumb ass.
> 
> This is about government making money, but dupes can't see it even though it is clear as day.
Click to expand...

How are they making money ?


----------



## gipper

Tommy Tainant said:


> gipper said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Tommy Tainant said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> gipper said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Tommy Tainant said:
> 
> 
> 
> Wow, the chimps are all out tonight.
> 
> I am far from being a defender of the London cabbie.
> 
> But they do have to be registered and pass certain checks before they are licensed.
> 
> Its a basic thing that is done.
> 
> So we can weed out the paedos,murderers and rapists.
> 
> I think even you nutters can agree that is a GOOD THING.
> 
> Uber are not fulfilling their duties in this respect. Neither are they being honest in reporting accidents.
> 
> Now, take a deep breath you thick fuckers, please explain how this decision is anything other than a correct decision that will protect the public.
> 
> When my kids are catching rides home I like to think that the driver is not a convicted pervert. Im sort of funny that way.
> 
> 
> 
> In other words, you love corrupt big government.
> 
> Can't fix stupid.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> In other words you want paedos and rapists driving kids around.
> Tidy !!
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Dumb as usual.
> 
> You really think taxi drivers are different?   Dumb ass.
> 
> This is about government making money, but dupes can't see it even though it is clear as day.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> How are they making money ?
Click to expand...

Asking such a question merely proves how uninformed you are.


----------



## K9Buck

bear513 said:


> Tommy Tainant said:
> 
> 
> 
> Wow, the chimps are all out tonight.
> 
> I am far from being a defender of the London cabbie.
> 
> But they do have to be registered and pass certain checks before they are licensed.
> 
> Its a basic thing that is done.
> 
> So we can weed out the paedos,murderers and rapists.
> 
> I think even you nutters can agree that is a GOOD THING.
> 
> Uber are not fulfilling their duties in this respect. Neither are they being honest in reporting accidents.
> 
> Now, take a deep breath you thick fuckers, please explain how this decision is anything other than a correct decision that will protect the public.
> 
> When my kids are catching rides home I like to think that the driver is not a convicted pervert. Im sort of funny that way.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Do you have proof of those allegation? I have not been reading any newstorys of uber drivers doing anything criminal..
Click to expand...


He's a hysterical little twat.


----------



## gipper

K9Buck said:


> bear513 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Tommy Tainant said:
> 
> 
> 
> Wow, the chimps are all out tonight.
> 
> I am far from being a defender of the London cabbie.
> 
> But they do have to be registered and pass certain checks before they are licensed.
> 
> Its a basic thing that is done.
> 
> So we can weed out the paedos,murderers and rapists.
> 
> I think even you nutters can agree that is a GOOD THING.
> 
> Uber are not fulfilling their duties in this respect. Neither are they being honest in reporting accidents.
> 
> Now, take a deep breath you thick fuckers, please explain how this decision is anything other than a correct decision that will protect the public.
> 
> When my kids are catching rides home I like to think that the driver is not a convicted pervert. Im sort of funny that way.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Do you have proof of those allegation? I have not been reading any newstorys of uber drivers doing anything criminal..
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> He's a hysterical little twat.
Click to expand...

True.  He believes whatever the ruling clsss tells him. The classic sign of a dupe.


----------



## Death Angel

gipper said:


> Dumb as usual.
> 
> You really think taxi drivers are different? Dumb ass.
> 
> This is about government making money, but dupes can't see it even though it is clear as day.


It's about sexual assault from the "immigrants"



> Freedom of Information data obtained by _The Sun_ last year showed that the Metropolitan Police investigated 32 drivers for rape or sexual assault of a passenger between May 2015 and May 2016.
> 
> In August, Metropolitan Police Inspector Neil Billany wrote to TfL about his concern that the company was failing to properly investigate allegations against its drivers.
> 
> He revealed the company had continued to employ a driver after he was accused of sexual assault. According to Inspector Billany, the same driver went on to assault another female passenger before he was removed.


----------



## Two Thumbs

Tommy Tainant said:


> Wow, the chimps are all out tonight.
> 
> I am far from being a defender of the London cabbie.
> 
> But they do have to be registered and pass certain checks before they are licensed.
> 
> Its a basic thing that is done.
> 
> So we can weed out the paedos,murderers and rapists.
> 
> I think even you nutters can agree that is a GOOD THING.
> 
> Uber are not fulfilling their duties in this respect. Neither are they being honest in reporting accidents.
> 
> Now, take a deep breath you thick fuckers, please explain how this decision is anything other than a correct decision that will protect the public.
> 
> When my kids are catching rides home I like to think that the driver is not a convicted pervert. Im sort of funny that way.


It's normal to do background checks.  Private industries can't have any marks against them or you nutters go nutty.

The government has no such need.

cabbies get schooled on where to go and how to get there and the use of their equipment, since uber has no need of such things...


----------



## Tommy Tainant

Two Thumbs said:


> Tommy Tainant said:
> 
> 
> 
> Wow, the chimps are all out tonight.
> 
> I am far from being a defender of the London cabbie.
> 
> But they do have to be registered and pass certain checks before they are licensed.
> 
> Its a basic thing that is done.
> 
> So we can weed out the paedos,murderers and rapists.
> 
> I think even you nutters can agree that is a GOOD THING.
> 
> Uber are not fulfilling their duties in this respect. Neither are they being honest in reporting accidents.
> 
> Now, take a deep breath you thick fuckers, please explain how this decision is anything other than a correct decision that will protect the public.
> 
> When my kids are catching rides home I like to think that the driver is not a convicted pervert. Im sort of funny that way.
> 
> 
> 
> It's normal to do background checks.  Private industries can't have any marks against them or you nutters go nutty.
> 
> The government has no such need.
> 
> cabbies get schooled on where to go and how to get there and the use of their equipment, since uber has no need of such things...
Click to expand...

I have no idea what point you are trying to make.


----------



## Tommy Tainant

Death Angel said:


> gipper said:
> 
> 
> 
> Dumb as usual.
> 
> You really think taxi drivers are different? Dumb ass.
> 
> This is about government making money, but dupes can't see it even though it is clear as day.
> 
> 
> 
> It's about sexual assault from the "immigrants"
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Freedom of Information data obtained by _The Sun_ last year showed that the Metropolitan Police investigated 32 drivers for rape or sexual assault of a passenger between May 2015 and May 2016.
> 
> In August, Metropolitan Police Inspector Neil Billany wrote to TfL about his concern that the company was failing to properly investigate allegations against its drivers.
> 
> He revealed the company had continued to employ a driver after he was accused of sexual assault. According to Inspector Billany, the same driver went on to assault another female passenger before he was removed.
> 
> Click to expand...
Click to expand...

Thank you for underlining why uber is a problem.


----------



## OnePercenter

gipper said:


> Because those taxi drivers are so much safer.
> 
> LMFAO.
> 
> Yet another example of big government corruption and you support it.



Rideshare is exploitation of it's contractors.


----------



## gipper

OnePercenter said:


> gipper said:
> 
> 
> 
> Because those taxi drivers are so much safer.
> 
> LMFAO.
> 
> Yet another example of big government corruption and you support it.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rideshare is exploitation of it's contractors.
Click to expand...

It may be, but that has nothing to do with why the government banned Uber.  It is about the money.  Always is.  

And besides, no one is forced to work for Uber.  Force is always what government does.


----------



## OnePercenter

gipper said:


> OnePercenter said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> gipper said:
> 
> 
> 
> Because those taxi drivers are so much safer.
> 
> LMFAO.
> 
> Yet another example of big government corruption and you support it.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rideshare is exploitation of it's contractors.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> It may be, but that has nothing to do with why the government banned Uber.  It is about the money.  Always is.
> 
> And besides, no one is forced to work for Uber.  Force is always what government does.
Click to expand...


The government is planning to exclude UBER from London because of the lack of accountability that current cab companies have to follow.

If you don't make a living wage you need a second job. (forced)

Rideshare is a predator to both their contractors as well as the public. Their operations are based on illegalities.


----------



## OnePercenter

Weatherman2020 said:


> bear513 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Tipsycatlover said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> gipper said:
> 
> 
> 
> Because those taxi drivers are so much safer.
> 
> LMFAO.
> 
> Yet another example of big government corruption and you support it.
> 
> 
> 
> Evidently, yes the taxis are safer. That's why uber is banned and not taxis.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Safer and easier to tax then uber drivers maybe
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> How dare the Little People attempt to make money using their own ambition!
Click to expand...


You mean taking advantage of the desperate?


----------



## Weatherman2020

OnePercenter said:


> Weatherman2020 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> bear513 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Tipsycatlover said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> gipper said:
> 
> 
> 
> Because those taxi drivers are so much safer.
> 
> LMFAO.
> 
> Yet another example of big government corruption and you support it.
> 
> 
> 
> Evidently, yes the taxis are safer. That's why uber is banned and not taxis.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Safer and easier to tax then uber drivers maybe
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> How dare the Little People attempt to make money using their own ambition!
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You mean taking advantage of the desperate?
Click to expand...

Uber drivers take advantage of the desperate!? Who knew!  What tremendous knowledge you guide us with!


----------



## OnePercenter

Weatherman2020 said:


> OnePercenter said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Weatherman2020 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> bear513 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Tipsycatlover said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> gipper said:
> 
> 
> 
> Because those taxi drivers are so much safer.
> 
> LMFAO.
> 
> Yet another example of big government corruption and you support it.
> 
> 
> 
> Evidently, yes the taxis are safer. That's why uber is banned and not taxis.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Safer and easier to tax then uber drivers maybe
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> How dare the Little People attempt to make money using their own ambition!
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You mean taking advantage of the desperate?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Uber drivers take advantage of the desperate!? Who knew!  What tremendous knowledge you guide us with!
Click to expand...


Rideshare does.


----------



## EvilCat Breath

Uber drivers are taking advantage of their passengers in London just like they do here. 

Uber driver accused of kidnapping, sexually assaulting intoxicated female passenger

Comprehensive List of Uber Incidents and Assaults | Who’s Driving You?

How risky is your Uber ride? Maybe more than you think

Uber, Lyft, rideshare, all used their positions to take advantage of their passengers.


----------



## Weatherman2020

OnePercenter said:


> Weatherman2020 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> OnePercenter said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Weatherman2020 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> bear513 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Tipsycatlover said:
> 
> 
> 
> Evidently, yes the taxis are safer. That's why uber is banned and not taxis.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Safer and easier to tax then uber drivers maybe
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> How dare the Little People attempt to make money using their own ambition!
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You mean taking advantage of the desperate?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Uber drivers take advantage of the desperate!? Who knew!  What tremendous knowledge you guide us with!
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Rideshare does.
Click to expand...

Lot of people love to keep going back and taken advantage of then!


----------



## EvilCat Breath

Weatherman2020 said:


> OnePercenter said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Weatherman2020 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> OnePercenter said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Weatherman2020 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> bear513 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Safer and easier to tax then uber drivers maybe
> 
> 
> 
> How dare the Little People attempt to make money using their own ambition!
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You mean taking advantage of the desperate?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Uber drivers take advantage of the desperate!? Who knew!  What tremendous knowledge you guide us with!
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Rideshare does.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Lot of people love to keep going back and taken advantage of then!
Click to expand...

Enough people DIDN'T want to be taken advantage of, that London banned Uber completely.   So I guess you are wrong.


----------



## OnePercenter

Weatherman2020 said:


> OnePercenter said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Weatherman2020 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> OnePercenter said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Weatherman2020 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> bear513 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Safer and easier to tax then uber drivers maybe
> 
> 
> 
> How dare the Little People attempt to make money using their own ambition!
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You mean taking advantage of the desperate?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Uber drivers take advantage of the desperate!? Who knew!  What tremendous knowledge you guide us with!
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Rideshare does.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Lot of people love to keep going back and taken advantage of then!
Click to expand...


I'll go slow for you. The issue I was addressing was rideshare contractors.


----------



## gipper

OnePercenter said:


> Weatherman2020 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> OnePercenter said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Weatherman2020 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> OnePercenter said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Weatherman2020 said:
> 
> 
> 
> How dare the Little People attempt to make money using their own ambition!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You mean taking advantage of the desperate?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Uber drivers take advantage of the desperate!? Who knew!  What tremendous knowledge you guide us with!
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Rideshare does.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Lot of people love to keep going back and taken advantage of then!
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I'll go slow for you. The issue I was addressing was rideshare contractors.
Click to expand...

It will all be moot, once they impose the driverless car.


----------



## Weatherman2020

gipper said:


> OnePercenter said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Weatherman2020 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> OnePercenter said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Weatherman2020 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> OnePercenter said:
> 
> 
> 
> You mean taking advantage of the desperate?
> 
> 
> 
> Uber drivers take advantage of the desperate!? Who knew!  What tremendous knowledge you guide us with!
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Rideshare does.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Lot of people love to keep going back and taken advantage of then!
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I'll go slow for you. The issue I was addressing was rideshare contractors.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> It will all be moot, once they impose the driverless car.
Click to expand...

I think the Brits deserve the first driverless cars.  With this latest action they deserve it.


----------



## Weatherman2020

OnePercenter said:


> Weatherman2020 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> OnePercenter said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Weatherman2020 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> OnePercenter said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Weatherman2020 said:
> 
> 
> 
> How dare the Little People attempt to make money using their own ambition!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You mean taking advantage of the desperate?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Uber drivers take advantage of the desperate!? Who knew!  What tremendous knowledge you guide us with!
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Rideshare does.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Lot of people love to keep going back and taken advantage of then!
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I'll go slow for you. The issue I was addressing was rideshare contractors.
Click to expand...

Start your own thread then, this is about uber.


----------



## Weatherman2020

Tipsycatlover said:


> Weatherman2020 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> OnePercenter said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Weatherman2020 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> OnePercenter said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Weatherman2020 said:
> 
> 
> 
> How dare the Little People attempt to make money using their own ambition!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You mean taking advantage of the desperate?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Uber drivers take advantage of the desperate!? Who knew!  What tremendous knowledge you guide us with!
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Rideshare does.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Lot of people love to keep going back and taken advantage of then!
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Enough people DIDN'T want to be taken advantage of, that London banned Uber completely.   So I guess you are wrong.
Click to expand...

Why would the government need to ban something no one was using?  Have they banned photon death ray handguns?


----------



## EvilCat Breath

Weatherman2020 said:


> Tipsycatlover said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Weatherman2020 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> OnePercenter said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Weatherman2020 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> OnePercenter said:
> 
> 
> 
> You mean taking advantage of the desperate?
> 
> 
> 
> Uber drivers take advantage of the desperate!? Who knew!  What tremendous knowledge you guide us with!
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Rideshare does.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Lot of people love to keep going back and taken advantage of then!
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Enough people DIDN'T want to be taken advantage of, that London banned Uber completely.   So I guess you are wrong.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Why would the government need to ban something no one was using?  Have they banned photon death ray handguns?
Click to expand...

No one said they weren't using the service.  They were using the service and getting attacked.  The service was not safe.  Could not be made safe and now it is no more, at least in London.


----------



## SobieskiSavedEurope

So much banned in the UK, is it still legal to take a poo-poo in your own toilet you own?


----------



## Weatherman2020

Tipsycatlover said:


> Weatherman2020 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Tipsycatlover said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Weatherman2020 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> OnePercenter said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Weatherman2020 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Uber drivers take advantage of the desperate!? Who knew!  What tremendous knowledge you guide us with!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rideshare does.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Lot of people love to keep going back and taken advantage of then!
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Enough people DIDN'T want to be taken advantage of, that London banned Uber completely.   So I guess you are wrong.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Why would the government need to ban something no one was using?  Have they banned photon death ray handguns?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> No one said they weren't using the service.  They were using the service and getting attacked.  The service was not safe.  Could not be made safe and now it is no more, at least in London.
Click to expand...

Uber works fine in America.  What's different?

Oh yeah, half of London are Islamofacists.


----------



## OnePercenter

gipper said:


> OnePercenter said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Weatherman2020 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> OnePercenter said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Weatherman2020 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> OnePercenter said:
> 
> 
> 
> You mean taking advantage of the desperate?
> 
> 
> 
> Uber drivers take advantage of the desperate!? Who knew!  What tremendous knowledge you guide us with!
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Rideshare does.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Lot of people love to keep going back and taken advantage of then!
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I'll go slow for you. The issue I was addressing was rideshare contractors.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> It will all be moot, once they impose the driverless car.
Click to expand...


Not in any of our lifetimes. Remember, planes can takeoff and land by themselves, but it takes the skill of a man to land on the Hudson. Computers are far from perfect to remove man from the equation.


----------



## OnePercenter

Weatherman2020 said:


> OnePercenter said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Weatherman2020 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> OnePercenter said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Weatherman2020 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> OnePercenter said:
> 
> 
> 
> You mean taking advantage of the desperate?
> 
> 
> 
> Uber drivers take advantage of the desperate!? Who knew!  What tremendous knowledge you guide us with!
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Rideshare does.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Lot of people love to keep going back and taken advantage of then!
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I'll go slow for you. The issue I was addressing was rideshare contractors.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Start your own thread then, this is about uber.
Click to expand...


UBER IS A RIDE SHARE COMPANY!!!!! DOLT!!!!


----------



## gipper

OnePercenter said:


> gipper said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> OnePercenter said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Weatherman2020 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> OnePercenter said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Weatherman2020 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Uber drivers take advantage of the desperate!? Who knew!  What tremendous knowledge you guide us with!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rideshare does.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Lot of people love to keep going back and taken advantage of then!
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I'll go slow for you. The issue I was addressing was rideshare contractors.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> It will all be moot, once they impose the driverless car.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Not in any of our lifetimes. Remember, planes can takeoff and land by themselves, but it takes the skill of a man to land on the Hudson. Computers are far from perfect to remove man from the equation.
Click to expand...


I don't agree.  The government will likely force us into driverless cars....probably within the next 10 years.


----------



## EvilCat Breath

Weatherman2020 said:


> Tipsycatlover said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Weatherman2020 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Tipsycatlover said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Weatherman2020 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> OnePercenter said:
> 
> 
> 
> Rideshare does.
> 
> 
> 
> Lot of people love to keep going back and taken advantage of then!
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Enough people DIDN'T want to be taken advantage of, that London banned Uber completely.   So I guess you are wrong.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Why would the government need to ban something no one was using?  Have they banned photon death ray handguns?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> No one said they weren't using the service.  They were using the service and getting attacked.  The service was not safe.  Could not be made safe and now it is no more, at least in London.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Uber works fine in America.  What's different?
> 
> Oh yeah, half of London are Islamofacists.
Click to expand...


That's the complaint.  It's the migrants with a sex attack on an average of every 11 days.


----------



## Tilly

gipper said:


> Because those taxi drivers are so much safer.
> 
> LMFAO.
> 
> Yet another example of big government corruption and you support it.


The mayor of London (Muslim) and the majority of non Uber taxi drivers - Muslim.
Do I need to say more?


----------



## Dont Taz Me Bro

Guaranteed this was all done through the influence of the taxi union. It's not about safety. It's about a leftist mayor placating his union base


----------



## OnePercenter

gipper said:


> OnePercenter said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> gipper said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> OnePercenter said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Weatherman2020 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> OnePercenter said:
> 
> 
> 
> Rideshare does.
> 
> 
> 
> Lot of people love to keep going back and taken advantage of then!
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I'll go slow for you. The issue I was addressing was rideshare contractors.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> It will all be moot, once they impose the driverless car.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Not in any of our lifetimes. Remember, planes can takeoff and land by themselves, but it takes the skill of a man to land on the Hudson. Computers are far from perfect to remove man from the equation.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I don't agree.  The government will likely force us into driverless cars....probably within the next 10 years.
Click to expand...


Driverless cars don't exist and won't in ten years. I own two Teslas with drive assist, they are good but far from perfect or as good as a human.


----------



## OnePercenter

Dont Taz Me Bro said:


> Guaranteed this was all done through the influence of the taxi union. It's not about safety. It's about a leftist mayor placating his union base



BULLSHIT!!!!! It's about rideshare working under the same laws a taxi cabs. 

All of rideshare business platform's are based in illegalities, then paying off politicians.


----------



## OnePercenter

Tipsycatlover said:


> Weatherman2020 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Tipsycatlover said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Weatherman2020 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Tipsycatlover said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Weatherman2020 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Lot of people love to keep going back and taken advantage of then!
> 
> 
> 
> Enough people DIDN'T want to be taken advantage of, that London banned Uber completely.   So I guess you are wrong.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Why would the government need to ban something no one was using?  Have they banned photon death ray handguns?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> No one said they weren't using the service.  They were using the service and getting attacked.  The service was not safe.  Could not be made safe and now it is no more, at least in London.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Uber works fine in America.  What's different?
> 
> Oh yeah, half of London are Islamofacists.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> That's the complaint.  It's the migrants with a sex attack on an average of every 11 days.
Click to expand...


The complaint as written where?


----------



## Manonthestreet

Backlash over bombshell decision to ban Uber from London | Daily Mail Online


----------



## Tilly

Tommy Tainant said:


> Uber deserved to lose its licence – Londoners’ safety must come first | Sadiq Khan
> 
> Safety concerns.


And bikini adverts are dangerous too.
Yet we must just get used to islamic terrorism.
Lol.


----------



## Tilly

bear513 said:


> Tipsycatlover said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> gipper said:
> 
> 
> 
> Because those taxi drivers are so much safer.
> 
> LMFAO.
> 
> Yet another example of big government corruption and you support it.
> 
> 
> 
> Evidently, yes the taxis are safer. That's why uber is banned and not taxis.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Safer and easier to tax then uber drivers maybe
Click to expand...

In London most taxi drivers are of Pakistani origin. Uber - not so much.


----------



## Tilly

Tommy Tainant said:


> Wow, the chimps are all out tonight.
> 
> I am far from being a defender of the London cabbie.
> 
> But they do have to be registered and pass certain checks before they are licensed.
> 
> Its a basic thing that is done.
> 
> So we can weed out the paedos,murderers and rapists.
> 
> I think even you nutters can agree that is a GOOD THING.
> 
> Uber are not fulfilling their duties in this respect. Neither are they being honest in reporting accidents.
> 
> Now, take a deep breath you thick fuckers, please explain how this decision is anything other than a correct decision that will protect the public.
> 
> When my kids are catching rides home I like to think that the driver is not a convicted pervert. Im sort of funny that way.


 it isn't just about black cabs, but taxi firms too.


----------



## Bob Blaylock

Tommy Tainant said:


> In other words you want paedos and rapists driving kids around.



  Says the guy who staunchly defends homosexuals and other foul sexual perverts.


----------



## EvilCat Breath

Tilly said:


> bear513 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Tipsycatlover said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> gipper said:
> 
> 
> 
> Because those taxi drivers are so much safer.
> 
> LMFAO.
> 
> Yet another example of big government corruption and you support it.
> 
> 
> 
> Evidently, yes the taxis are safer. That's why uber is banned and not taxis.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Safer and easier to tax then uber drivers maybe
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> In London most taxi drivers are of Pakistani origin. Uber - not so much.
Click to expand...

Then who are the migrants doing the assaulting?


----------



## Two Thumbs

OnePercenter said:


> gipper said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> OnePercenter said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> gipper said:
> 
> 
> 
> Because those taxi drivers are so much safer.
> 
> LMFAO.
> 
> Yet another example of big government corruption and you support it.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rideshare is exploitation of it's contractors.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> It may be, but that has nothing to do with why the government banned Uber.  It is about the money.  Always is.
> 
> And besides, no one is forced to work for Uber.  Force is always what government does.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The government is planning to exclude UBER from London because of the lack of accountability that current cab companies have to follow.
> 
> If you don't make a living wage you need a second job. *(forced)*
> 
> Rideshare is a predator to both their contractors as well as the public. Their operations are based on illegalities.
Click to expand...

The level of fucking stewpud to think that...


----------



## Tommy Tainant

Ive used Uber twice.

Once whilst in Europe,my son booked one for the trip from the airport into town. I thought that it was a fair price.

The second time was in Liverpool.My daughter booked it to take me and her Mam back to Lime St Station.It was a 3 mile run but we were only charged £4. (I think). It took 45 minutes because of the traffic. After Uber had taken their cut the driver was working for half the living wage. I dont want to be a party to that.

It seems to be a parasitic company that will undercut legit businesses until it has control of the market. Then it will squeeze you.

My guess is that they will have to make changes if they want to carry on.Whether their business model allows that is another matter.

These are the issues and they are not trivial.

*Its approach to reporting serious criminal offences.

Its approach to how medical certificates are obtained.

Its approach to how Enhanced Disclosure and Barring Service (DBS) checks are obtained.

Its approach to explaining the use of Greyball in London - software that could be used to block regulatory bodies from gaining full access to the app and prevent officials from undertaking regulatory or law enforcement duties.*

These seem to be mainly Police issues and the police have a big say in the granting of licenses in the UK.

The company has also fallen foul of other jurisdictions and has recently been banned in Denmark.
Uber to shut down Denmark operation over new taxi laws


----------



## Tommy Tainant

OnePercenter said:


> Dont Taz Me Bro said:
> 
> 
> 
> Guaranteed this was all done through the influence of the taxi union. It's not about safety. It's about a leftist mayor placating his union base
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BULLSHIT!!!!! It's about rideshare working under the same laws a taxi cabs.
> 
> All of rideshare business platform's are based in illegalities, then paying off politicians.
Click to expand...

If a business cannot operate without flouting legal requirements then it isnt a business. Vetting drivers,paying a minimum wage,co-operating with the police when its employees rape customers. These arent "nice to haves".


----------



## Tommy Tainant

Tilly said:


> bear513 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Tipsycatlover said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> gipper said:
> 
> 
> 
> Because those taxi drivers are so much safer.
> 
> LMFAO.
> 
> Yet another example of big government corruption and you support it.
> 
> 
> 
> Evidently, yes the taxis are safer. That's why uber is banned and not taxis.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Safer and easier to tax then uber drivers maybe
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> In London most taxi drivers are of Pakistani origin. Uber - not so much.
Click to expand...

Source ?


----------



## Tommy Tainant

Weatherman2020 said:


> Tommy Tainant said:
> 
> 
> 
> Uber deserved to lose its licence – Londoners’ safety must come first | Sadiq Khan
> 
> Safety concerns.
> 
> 
> 
> “Health and safety” is the plea for every infringement of human freedom in Britain today – it is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves.
Click to expand...

Health and safety is a big issue in London at the moment.


----------



## Meathead

Tommy Tainant said:


> Uber deserved to lose its licence – Londoners’ safety must come first | Sadiq Khan
> 
> Safety concerns.


Get rid of Muslims if you want safety.


----------



## Weatherman2020

Tommy Tainant said:


> Weatherman2020 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Tommy Tainant said:
> 
> 
> 
> Uber deserved to lose its licence – Londoners’ safety must come first | Sadiq Khan
> 
> Safety concerns.
> 
> 
> 
> “Health and safety” is the plea for every infringement of human freedom in Britain today – it is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Health and safety is a big issue in London at the moment.
Click to expand...

Health and safety is an excuse used by tyrants to eliminate freedoms in the UK.


----------



## Tommy Tainant

Weatherman2020 said:


> Tommy Tainant said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Weatherman2020 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Tommy Tainant said:
> 
> 
> 
> Uber deserved to lose its licence – Londoners’ safety must come first | Sadiq Khan
> 
> Safety concerns.
> 
> 
> 
> “Health and safety” is the plea for every infringement of human freedom in Britain today – it is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Health and safety is a big issue in London at the moment.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Health and safety is an excuse used by tyrants to eliminate freedoms in the UK.
Click to expand...

Nope, health and safety regs would have prevented the Grenfell Fire. They were binned by the current government as unnecessary.
Are you on crack or something ?


----------



## Tommy Tainant

The scandal that brought Uber down

Scum.

*Freedom of Information data obtained by The Sun last year showed that the Metropolitan Police investigated 32 drivers for rape or sexual assault of a passenger between May 2015 and May 2016.*

_*In August, Metropolitan Police Inspector Neil Billany wrote to TfL about his concern that the company was failing to properly investigate allegations against its drivers.

He revealed the company had continued to employ a driver after he was accused of sexual assault. According to Inspector Billany, the same driver went on to assault another female passenger before he was removed.

The letter said: "By not reporting to police promptly, Uber are allowing situations to develop that clearly affect the safety and security of the public."
*
You have to ask why the authorities have left it so long to take action.
*
*_


----------



## OnePercenter

Tilly said:


> bear513 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Tipsycatlover said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> gipper said:
> 
> 
> 
> Because those taxi drivers are so much safer.
> 
> LMFAO.
> 
> Yet another example of big government corruption and you support it.
> 
> 
> 
> Evidently, yes the taxis are safer. That's why uber is banned and not taxis.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Safer and easier to tax then uber drivers maybe
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> In London most taxi drivers are of Pakistani origin. Uber - not so much.
Click to expand...


When I was in London for the Olympics, I took many cabs and most drivers were white. This has somehow changed? Or are you talking out your ass?


----------



## OnePercenter

UBER should be brought down. It's a disorganized company that's business plan is based on illegalities.


----------



## gipper

OnePercenter said:


> Tilly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> bear513 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Tipsycatlover said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> gipper said:
> 
> 
> 
> Because those taxi drivers are so much safer.
> 
> LMFAO.
> 
> Yet another example of big government corruption and you support it.
> 
> 
> 
> Evidently, yes the taxis are safer. That's why uber is banned and not taxis.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Safer and easier to tax then uber drivers maybe
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> In London most taxi drivers are of Pakistani origin. Uber - not so much.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> When I was in London for the Olympics, I took many cabs and most drivers were white. This has somehow changed? Or are you talking out your ass?
Click to expand...

Were you really in London, or are you talking out your ass?


----------



## gipper

OnePercenter said:


> UBER should be brought down. It's a disorganized company that's business plan is based on illegalities.


Millions of people rely on Uber and other ride sharing services.  They very much like the convenience and ease of using these services.  Many poor people really like Uber, as they can't afford a car or the high prices of taxis. 

Why do you hate poor people?


----------



## Tommy Tainant

gipper said:


> OnePercenter said:
> 
> 
> 
> UBER should be brought down. It's a disorganized company that's business plan is based on illegalities.
> 
> 
> 
> Millions of people rely on Uber and other ride sharing services.  They very much like the convenience and ease of using these services.  Many poor people really like Uber, as they can't afford a car or the high prices of taxis.
> 
> Why do you hate poor people?
Click to expand...

Why dont uber comply with the local regulations ?


----------



## gipper

Tommy Tainant said:


> gipper said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> OnePercenter said:
> 
> 
> 
> UBER should be brought down. It's a disorganized company that's business plan is based on illegalities.
> 
> 
> 
> Millions of people rely on Uber and other ride sharing services.  They very much like the convenience and ease of using these services.  Many poor people really like Uber, as they can't afford a car or the high prices of taxis.
> 
> Why do you hate poor people?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Why dont uber comply with the local regulations ?
Click to expand...

If they did not comply, then they should be fined.  Banning them is not the solution.  Thousands of your fellow Brits were Uber drivers in London, trying to make a living.  Why do you want them impoverished?

Why do you want to force poor people to pay for the high cost and inefficiency that is taxi service?


----------



## Tommy Tainant

gipper said:


> Tommy Tainant said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> gipper said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> OnePercenter said:
> 
> 
> 
> UBER should be brought down. It's a disorganized company that's business plan is based on illegalities.
> 
> 
> 
> Millions of people rely on Uber and other ride sharing services.  They very much like the convenience and ease of using these services.  Many poor people really like Uber, as they can't afford a car or the high prices of taxis.
> 
> Why do you hate poor people?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Why dont uber comply with the local regulations ?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> If they did not comply, then they should be fined.  Banning them is not the solution.  Thousands of your fellow Brits were Uber drivers in London, trying to make a living.  Why do you want them impoverished?
> 
> Why do you want to force poor people to pay for the high cost and inefficiency that is taxi service?
Click to expand...

They know the rules, they have had ample time to comply. They have let down their employees that are not rapists. Why do you defend this ?


----------



## gipper

Tommy Tainant said:


> gipper said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Tommy Tainant said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> gipper said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> OnePercenter said:
> 
> 
> 
> UBER should be brought down. It's a disorganized company that's business plan is based on illegalities.
> 
> 
> 
> Millions of people rely on Uber and other ride sharing services.  They very much like the convenience and ease of using these services.  Many poor people really like Uber, as they can't afford a car or the high prices of taxis.
> 
> Why do you hate poor people?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Why dont uber comply with the local regulations ?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> If they did not comply, then they should be fined.  Banning them is not the solution.  Thousands of your fellow Brits were Uber drivers in London, trying to make a living.  Why do you want them impoverished?
> 
> Why do you want to force poor people to pay for the high cost and inefficiency that is taxi service?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> They know the rules, they have had ample time to comply. They have let down their employees that are not rapists. Why do you defend this ?
Click to expand...

Why do you hate people having options for transportation?

Why do you support a criminal operation (government), using force to implement it's heinous policies?


----------



## Tommy Tainant

gipper said:


> Tommy Tainant said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> gipper said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Tommy Tainant said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> gipper said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> OnePercenter said:
> 
> 
> 
> UBER should be brought down. It's a disorganized company that's business plan is based on illegalities.
> 
> 
> 
> Millions of people rely on Uber and other ride sharing services.  They very much like the convenience and ease of using these services.  Many poor people really like Uber, as they can't afford a car or the high prices of taxis.
> 
> Why do you hate poor people?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Why dont uber comply with the local regulations ?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> If they did not comply, then they should be fined.  Banning them is not the solution.  Thousands of your fellow Brits were Uber drivers in London, trying to make a living.  Why do you want them impoverished?
> 
> Why do you want to force poor people to pay for the high cost and inefficiency that is taxi service?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> They know the rules, they have had ample time to comply. They have let down their employees that are not rapists. Why do you defend this ?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Why do you hate people having options for transportation?
> 
> Why do you support a criminal operation (government), using force to implement it's heinous policies?
Click to expand...

Uber are the criminals and Transport for London are protecting us from their criminality.


----------



## gipper

Tommy Tainant said:


> gipper said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Tommy Tainant said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> gipper said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Tommy Tainant said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> gipper said:
> 
> 
> 
> Millions of people rely on Uber and other ride sharing services.  They very much like the convenience and ease of using these services.  Many poor people really like Uber, as they can't afford a car or the high prices of taxis.
> 
> Why do you hate poor people?
> 
> 
> 
> Why dont uber comply with the local regulations ?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> If they did not comply, then they should be fined.  Banning them is not the solution.  Thousands of your fellow Brits were Uber drivers in London, trying to make a living.  Why do you want them impoverished?
> 
> Why do you want to force poor people to pay for the high cost and inefficiency that is taxi service?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> They know the rules, they have had ample time to comply. They have let down their employees that are not rapists. Why do you defend this ?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Why do you hate people having options for transportation?
> 
> Why do you support a criminal operation (government), using force to implement it's heinous policies?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Uber are the criminals and Transport for London are protecting us from their criminality.
Click to expand...

Government is the criminal, but you are too dense to comprehend it even though it is so transparent.


----------



## Votto

BulletProof said:


> This seems to be nothing but a case of @ssholes in government.



Not so, about 100 people a day die from unsafe Uber in the states......or was that from opiate abuse?

It's so hard to keep straight.

Save us Big Brother!!


----------



## Tommy Tainant

Uber grovel to get back license.

Uber Regroups After London Taxi Setback as Lyft Signals Interest


----------



## BulletProof

3.5 million people use Uber every 90 days.  And, in a year, there has been 35 complaints of sexual assault.  I wonder how many sexual assault complaints the old taxi companies have had?


----------



## Tommy Tainant

BulletProof said:


> 3.5 million people use Uber every 90 days.  And, in a year, there has been 35 complaints of sexual assault.  I wonder how many sexual assault complaints the old tax companies have had?


They covered up those assaults and refused to help the police with their enquiries. How bad do they need to be before you nutjobs get concerned ?


----------



## BulletProof

Tommy Tainant said:


> They covered up those assaults and refused to help the police with their enquiries. How bad do they need to be before you nutjobs get concerned ?



I'm always concerned about sexual assaults.  Rapists should be hung by the neck until dead (ditto for false accusers).  

But, do you lock up all blacks just because most of them commit crimes?  Why shut down all Uber in the city just because a very tiny minority have been accused of sexual assault?  But, also, if sexual assault is the reason is a reason to close Uber, then close taxi companies if their drivers have been accused of sexual assault.  Aren't you concerned about taxi drivers sexually assaulting people?


----------



## Tommy Tainant

BulletProof said:


> Tommy Tainant said:
> 
> 
> 
> They covered up those assaults and refused to help the police with their enquiries. How bad do they need to be before you nutjobs get concerned ?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I'm always concerned about sexual assaults.  Rapists should be hung by the neck until dead (ditto for false accusers).
> 
> But, do you lock up all blacks just because most of them commit crimes?  Why shut down all Uber in the city just because a very tiny minority have been accused of sexual assault?  But, also, if sexual assault is the reason is a reason to close Uber, then close taxi companies if their drivers have been accused of sexual assault.  Aren't you concerned about taxi drivers sexually assaulting people?
Click to expand...

Taxi drivers,black cabs, are owner drivers. They are not employed by anyone else. If they misbehave they are charged,tried and convicted. Uber covers up when its drivers rape and assault. That is the culture of the company from top to bottom. They are a corporate shit stain.
I would expect other authorities to follow suit.


----------



## Dogmaphobe

Tommy Tainant said:


> gipper said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Tommy Tainant said:
> 
> 
> 
> Wow, the chimps are all out tonight.
> 
> I am far from being a defender of the London cabbie.
> 
> But they do have to be registered and pass certain checks before they are licensed.
> 
> Its a basic thing that is done.
> 
> So we can weed out the paedos,murderers and rapists.
> 
> I think even you nutters can agree that is a GOOD THING.
> 
> Uber are not fulfilling their duties in this respect. Neither are they being honest in reporting accidents.
> 
> Now, take a deep breath you thick fuckers, please explain how this decision is anything other than a correct decision that will protect the public.
> 
> When my kids are catching rides home I like to think that the driver is not a convicted pervert. Im sort of funny that way.
> 
> 
> 
> In other words, you love corrupt big government.
> 
> Can't fix stupid.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> In other words you want paedos and rapists driving kids around.
> Tidy !!
Click to expand...

Pedos and rapists?  


You mean, like the ones in Rotherham you always defend?


----------



## Tommy Tainant

Dogmaphobe said:


> Tommy Tainant said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> gipper said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Tommy Tainant said:
> 
> 
> 
> Wow, the chimps are all out tonight.
> 
> I am far from being a defender of the London cabbie.
> 
> But they do have to be registered and pass certain checks before they are licensed.
> 
> Its a basic thing that is done.
> 
> So we can weed out the paedos,murderers and rapists.
> 
> I think even you nutters can agree that is a GOOD THING.
> 
> Uber are not fulfilling their duties in this respect. Neither are they being honest in reporting accidents.
> 
> Now, take a deep breath you thick fuckers, please explain how this decision is anything other than a correct decision that will protect the public.
> 
> When my kids are catching rides home I like to think that the driver is not a convicted pervert. Im sort of funny that way.
> 
> 
> 
> In other words, you love corrupt big government.
> 
> Can't fix stupid.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> In other words you want paedos and rapists driving kids around.
> Tidy !!
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Pedos and rapists?
> 
> 
> You mean, like the ones in Rotherham you always defend?
Click to expand...

I have never defended any paedo or rapist you lying fuck.


----------



## OnePercenter

gipper said:


> OnePercenter said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Tilly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> bear513 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Tipsycatlover said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> gipper said:
> 
> 
> 
> Because those taxi drivers are so much safer.
> 
> LMFAO.
> 
> Yet another example of big government corruption and you support it.
> 
> 
> 
> Evidently, yes the taxis are safer. That's why uber is banned and not taxis.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Safer and easier to tax then uber drivers maybe
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> In London most taxi drivers are of Pakistani origin. Uber - not so much.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> When I was in London for the Olympics, I took many cabs and most drivers were white. This has somehow changed? Or are you talking out your ass?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Were you really in London, or are you talking out your ass?
Click to expand...


2012 Summer Olympics.


----------



## OnePercenter

gipper said:


> OnePercenter said:
> 
> 
> 
> UBER should be brought down. It's a disorganized company that's business plan is based on illegalities.
> 
> 
> 
> Millions of people rely on Uber and other ride sharing services.  They very much like the convenience and ease of using these services.  Many poor people really like Uber, as they can't afford a car or the high prices of taxis.
> 
> Why do you hate poor people?
Click to expand...


What did those 'millions of people' rely on before rideshare?


----------



## Tilly

Dogmaphobe said:


> Tommy Tainant said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> gipper said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Tommy Tainant said:
> 
> 
> 
> Wow, the chimps are all out tonight.
> 
> I am far from being a defender of the London cabbie.
> 
> But they do have to be registered and pass certain checks before they are licensed.
> 
> Its a basic thing that is done.
> 
> So we can weed out the paedos,murderers and rapists.
> 
> I think even you nutters can agree that is a GOOD THING.
> 
> Uber are not fulfilling their duties in this respect. Neither are they being honest in reporting accidents.
> 
> Now, take a deep breath you thick fuckers, please explain how this decision is anything other than a correct decision that will protect the public.
> 
> When my kids are catching rides home I like to think that the driver is not a convicted pervert. Im sort of funny that way.
> 
> 
> 
> In other words, you love corrupt big government.
> 
> Can't fix stupid.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> In other words you want paedos and rapists driving kids around.
> Tidy !!
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Pedos and rapists?
> 
> 
> You mean, like the ones in Rotherham you always defend?
Click to expand...

Suddenly he cares about rapists and thinks it's a good idea for 40,000 people to lose their livelihoods based on the actions of the few!
Well 99.99% of the Rotherham paedo rape ring were Pakistanis - as were those in 11 other UK cities where paedo rape rings were discovered - yet Tammy kept excusing them - based on tammytard ™ logic surely Pakistanis should be banned


----------



## Tilly

Tommy Tainant said:


> Dogmaphobe said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Tommy Tainant said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> gipper said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Tommy Tainant said:
> 
> 
> 
> Wow, the chimps are all out tonight.
> 
> I am far from being a defender of the London cabbie.
> 
> But they do have to be registered and pass certain checks before they are licensed.
> 
> Its a basic thing that is done.
> 
> So we can weed out the paedos,murderers and rapists.
> 
> I think even you nutters can agree that is a GOOD THING.
> 
> Uber are not fulfilling their duties in this respect. Neither are they being honest in reporting accidents.
> 
> Now, take a deep breath you thick fuckers, please explain how this decision is anything other than a correct decision that will protect the public.
> 
> When my kids are catching rides home I like to think that the driver is not a convicted pervert. Im sort of funny that way.
> 
> 
> 
> In other words, you love corrupt big government.
> 
> Can't fix stupid.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> In other words you want paedos and rapists driving kids around.
> Tidy !!
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Pedos and rapists?
> 
> 
> You mean, like the ones in Rotherham you always defend?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I have never defended any paedo or rapist you lying fuck.
Click to expand...

Yes, you did. Over and over again on many threads.


----------



## Dogmaphobe

Tommy Tainant said:


> Dogmaphobe said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Tommy Tainant said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> gipper said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Tommy Tainant said:
> 
> 
> 
> Wow, the chimps are all out tonight.
> 
> I am far from being a defender of the London cabbie.
> 
> But they do have to be registered and pass certain checks before they are licensed.
> 
> Its a basic thing that is done.
> 
> So we can weed out the paedos,murderers and rapists.
> 
> I think even you nutters can agree that is a GOOD THING.
> 
> Uber are not fulfilling their duties in this respect. Neither are they being honest in reporting accidents.
> 
> Now, take a deep breath you thick fuckers, please explain how this decision is anything other than a correct decision that will protect the public.
> 
> When my kids are catching rides home I like to think that the driver is not a convicted pervert. Im sort of funny that way.
> 
> 
> 
> In other words, you love corrupt big government.
> 
> Can't fix stupid.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> In other words you want paedos and rapists driving kids around.
> Tidy !!
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Pedos and rapists?
> 
> 
> You mean, like the ones in Rotherham you always defend?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I have never defended any paedo or rapist you lying fuck.
Click to expand...

You must mean, whenever it isn't a Muslim.


----------



## OnePercenter

Should rideshare follow the same rules and regulations as taxi cabs? YES


----------



## Tommy Tainant

Tilly said:


> Tommy Tainant said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Dogmaphobe said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Tommy Tainant said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> gipper said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Tommy Tainant said:
> 
> 
> 
> Wow, the chimps are all out tonight.
> 
> I am far from being a defender of the London cabbie.
> 
> But they do have to be registered and pass certain checks before they are licensed.
> 
> Its a basic thing that is done.
> 
> So we can weed out the paedos,murderers and rapists.
> 
> I think even you nutters can agree that is a GOOD THING.
> 
> Uber are not fulfilling their duties in this respect. Neither are they being honest in reporting accidents.
> 
> Now, take a deep breath you thick fuckers, please explain how this decision is anything other than a correct decision that will protect the public.
> 
> When my kids are catching rides home I like to think that the driver is not a convicted pervert. Im sort of funny that way.
> 
> 
> 
> In other words, you love corrupt big government.
> 
> Can't fix stupid.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> In other words you want paedos and rapists driving kids around.
> Tidy !!
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Pedos and rapists?
> 
> 
> You mean, like the ones in Rotherham you always defend?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I have never defended any paedo or rapist you lying fuck.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Yes, you did. Over and over again on many threads.
Click to expand...

Show me just one.


----------



## Tommy Tainant

OnePercenter said:


> gipper said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> OnePercenter said:
> 
> 
> 
> UBER should be brought down. It's a disorganized company that's business plan is based on illegalities.
> 
> 
> 
> Millions of people rely on Uber and other ride sharing services.  They very much like the convenience and ease of using these services.  Many poor people really like Uber, as they can't afford a car or the high prices of taxis.
> 
> Why do you hate poor people?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> What did those 'millions of people' rely on before rideshare?
Click to expand...

They caught the tube or the bus service or paid a little bit extra to a legitimate service.


----------



## Dogmaphobe

Tommy Tainant said:


> Tilly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Tommy Tainant said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Dogmaphobe said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Tommy Tainant said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> gipper said:
> 
> 
> 
> In other words, you love corrupt big government.
> 
> Can't fix stupid.
> 
> 
> 
> In other words you want paedos and rapists driving kids around.
> Tidy !!
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Pedos and rapists?
> 
> 
> You mean, like the ones in Rotherham you always defend?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I have never defended any paedo or rapist you lying fuck.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Yes, you did. Over and over again on many threads.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Show me just one.
Click to expand...

You mean, besides every single time the subject comes up?


----------



## Tommy Tainant

Dogmaphobe said:


> Tommy Tainant said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Tilly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Tommy Tainant said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Dogmaphobe said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Tommy Tainant said:
> 
> 
> 
> In other words you want paedos and rapists driving kids around.
> Tidy !!
> 
> 
> 
> Pedos and rapists?
> 
> 
> You mean, like the ones in Rotherham you always defend?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I have never defended any paedo or rapist you lying fuck.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Yes, you did. Over and over again on many threads.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Show me just one.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> You mean, besides every single time the subject comes up?
Click to expand...

Well Tilly is now searching her Tommy folder so maybe you can give me an instance where I have defended a paedo or rapist ?


----------



## Tommy Tainant

Hey Tilly, I know that you turn into a pumpkin at midnght. Dont stay up too late looking for something that aint there.


----------



## gipper

OnePercenter said:


> gipper said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> OnePercenter said:
> 
> 
> 
> UBER should be brought down. It's a disorganized company that's business plan is based on illegalities.
> 
> 
> 
> Millions of people rely on Uber and other ride sharing services.  They very much like the convenience and ease of using these services.  Many poor people really like Uber, as they can't afford a car or the high prices of taxis.
> 
> Why do you hate poor people?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> What did those 'millions of people' rely on before rideshare?
Click to expand...

Yeah....let's go back to the horse and buggy, because that is what millions relied on before the automobile.


----------



## Dogmaphobe

Tilly said:


> Tommy Tainant said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Dogmaphobe said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Tommy Tainant said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> gipper said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Tommy Tainant said:
> 
> 
> 
> Wow, the chimps are all out tonight.
> 
> I am far from being a defender of the London cabbie.
> 
> But they do have to be registered and pass certain checks before they are licensed.
> 
> Its a basic thing that is done.
> 
> So we can weed out the paedos,murderers and rapists.
> 
> I think even you nutters can agree that is a GOOD THING.
> 
> Uber are not fulfilling their duties in this respect. Neither are they being honest in reporting accidents.
> 
> Now, take a deep breath you thick fuckers, please explain how this decision is anything other than a correct decision that will protect the public.
> 
> When my kids are catching rides home I like to think that the driver is not a convicted pervert. Im sort of funny that way.
> 
> 
> 
> In other words, you love corrupt big government.
> 
> Can't fix stupid.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> In other words you want paedos and rapists driving kids around.
> Tidy !!
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Pedos and rapists?
> 
> 
> You mean, like the ones in Rotherham you always defend?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I have never defended any paedo or rapist you lying fuck.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Yes, you did. Over and over again on many threads.
Click to expand...

Now, Tilley -  the taint doesn't actually SUPPORT the rape of children by Muslims. 

All he does is call people names if they DON'T support it.  


Can't you see the difference?


----------



## Bob Blaylock

Tilly said:


> Suddenly he cares about rapists and thinks it's a good idea for 40,000 people to lose their livelihoods based on the actions of the few!
> Well 99.99% of the Rotherham paedo rape ring were Pakistanis - as were those in 11 other UK cities where paedo rape rings were discovered - yet Tammy kept excusing them - based on tammytard ™ logic surely Pakistanis should be banned



<Tommy Tainant>But that would be *RACIST*!  Raping women and molesting children is part of their culture, and we have no right to be insensitive and bigoted toward them because of it.</Tommy Tainant>


----------



## Tommy Tainant

Dogmaphobe said:


> Tilly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Tommy Tainant said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Dogmaphobe said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Tommy Tainant said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> gipper said:
> 
> 
> 
> In other words, you love corrupt big government.
> 
> Can't fix stupid.
> 
> 
> 
> In other words you want paedos and rapists driving kids around.
> Tidy !!
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Pedos and rapists?
> 
> 
> You mean, like the ones in Rotherham you always defend?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I have never defended any paedo or rapist you lying fuck.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Yes, you did. Over and over again on many threads.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Now, Tilley -  the taint doesn't actually SUPPORT the rape of children by Muslims.
> 
> All he does is call people names if they DON'T support it.
> 
> 
> Can't you see the difference?
Click to expand...

Shifting your position. And lying again. Piece of shit.


----------



## gipper

Tommy Tainant said:


> Hey Tilly, I know that you turn into a pumpkin at midnght. Dont stay up too late looking for something that aint there.


You defend Muslims every chance you get and we all know how some of them treat little boys.


----------



## Tommy Tainant

gipper said:


> Tommy Tainant said:
> 
> 
> 
> Hey Tilly, I know that you turn into a pumpkin at midnght. Dont stay up too late looking for something that aint there.
> 
> 
> 
> You defend Muslims every chance you get and we all know how some of them treat little boys.
Click to expand...

Muslims are ok. Paedos and rapists arent. Its not complicated.


----------



## Bob Blaylock

Tilly said:


> Suddenly he cares about rapists and thinks it's a good idea for 40,000 people to lose their livelihoods based on the actions of the few!
> Well 99.99% of the Rotherham paedo rape ring were Pakistanis - as were those in 11 other UK cities where paedo rape rings were discovered - yet Tammy kept excusing them - based on tammytard ™ logic surely Pakistanis should be banned



Tommy Tainant is certainly not at all shy about defending faggots and trannies, though he's a bit coy with his defense of rapists and child molesters.

  The bottom line, no matter how you spin it, is that when it comes to taking the side of decent people, or taking the side of sick sexual perverts, it's clear enough which side he will take.


----------



## Tilly

Tommy Tainant said:


> Dogmaphobe said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Tommy Tainant said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Tilly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Tommy Tainant said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Dogmaphobe said:
> 
> 
> 
> Pedos and rapists?
> 
> 
> You mean, like the ones in Rotherham you always defend?
> 
> 
> 
> I have never defended any paedo or rapist you lying fuck.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Yes, you did. Over and over again on many threads.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Show me just one.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> You mean, besides every single time the subject comes up?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Well Tilly is now searching her Tommy folder so maybe you can give me an instance where I have defended a paedo or rapist ?
Click to expand...

Tilly is doing no such thing, Tammytard. 
Your defence of Muslim grooming paedo rape gangs is well known. 
Anyone who wants to check just needs to look for threads on the Rotherham paedo rape gang, rape in Sweden, 'refugee' rape in Europe et al - or simply look at all the threads in which Tammytard calls female posters who object to these rape gangs 'Nazi Slags'


----------



## Tommy Tainant

Tilly said:


> Tommy Tainant said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Dogmaphobe said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Tommy Tainant said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Tilly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Tommy Tainant said:
> 
> 
> 
> I have never defended any paedo or rapist you lying fuck.
> 
> 
> 
> Yes, you did. Over and over again on many threads.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Show me just one.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> You mean, besides every single time the subject comes up?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Well Tilly is now searching her Tommy folder so maybe you can give me an instance where I have defended a paedo or rapist ?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Tilly is doing no such thing, Tammytard.
> Your defence of Muslim grooming paedo rape gangs is well known.
> Anyone who wants to check just needs to look for threads on the Rotherham paedo rape gang, rape in Sweden, 'refugee' rape in Europe et al - or simply look at all the threads in which Tammytard calls female posters who object to these rape gangs 'Nazi Slags'
Click to expand...

Lets see one thread then ?


----------



## Tommy Tainant

Bob Blaylock said:


> Tilly said:
> 
> 
> 
> Suddenly he cares about rapists and thinks it's a good idea for 40,000 people to lose their livelihoods based on the actions of the few!
> Well 99.99% of the Rotherham paedo rape ring were Pakistanis - as were those in 11 other UK cities where paedo rape rings were discovered - yet Tammy kept excusing them - based on tammytard ™ logic surely Pakistanis should be banned
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Tommy Tainant is certainly not at all shy about defending faggots and trannies, though he's a bit coy with his defense of rapists and child molesters.
> 
> The bottom line, no matter how you spin it, is that when it comes to taking the side of decent people, or taking the side of sick sexual perverts, it's clear enough which side he will take.
Click to expand...

There is a poison inside you Bob. Its really ugly.


----------



## Dogmaphobe

gipper said:


> Tommy Tainant said:
> 
> 
> 
> Hey Tilly, I know that you turn into a pumpkin at midnght. Dont stay up too late looking for something that aint there.
> 
> 
> 
> You defend Muslims every chance you get and we all know how some of them treat little boys.
Click to expand...

You shouldn't taunt the Taint like that, gipper.  

Can't you tell how despondent he is already over the knowledge that he is far too old for rape jihadists to ever consider passing him around as their own boy toy sex slave?


----------



## Bob Blaylock

Tommy Tainant said:


> There is a poison inside you Bob. Its [sic] really ugly.



  I'm not the one who takes the side of sick sexual perverts.  That would be you.


----------



## Bob Blaylock

Bob Blaylock said:


> Tommy Tainant is certainly not at all shy about defending faggots and trannies, though he's a bit coy with his defense of rapists and child molesters.
> 
> The bottom line, no matter how you spin it, is that when it comes to taking the side of decent people, or taking the side of sick sexual perverts, it's clear enough which side he will take.



  Almost on cue, here he is, starting a thread, not directly defending rapists and child molesters, but praising someone who is most infamous for the numbers of rapists, child molesters, terrorists, and other such filth that she is welcoming into her country.

Angela making history - afd suck on this.

  Thank you, Mr. Tainant, for once again showing how right I am when I declare that *LI*b*E*ralism is a mental and moral disease.


----------



## Tommy Tainant

Bob Blaylock said:


> Bob Blaylock said:
> 
> 
> 
> Tommy Tainant is certainly not at all shy about defending faggots and trannies, though he's a bit coy with his defense of rapists and child molesters.
> 
> The bottom line, no matter how you spin it, is that when it comes to taking the side of decent people, or taking the side of sick sexual perverts, it's clear enough which side he will take.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Almost on cue, here he is, starting a thread, not directly defending rapists and child molesters, but praising someone who is most infamous for the numbers of rapists, child molesters, terrorists, and other such filth that she is welcoming into her country.
> 
> Angela making history - afd suck on this.
> 
> Thank you, Mr. Tainant, for once again showing how right I am when I declare that *LI*b*E*ralism is a mental and moral disease.
Click to expand...


----------



## Tommy Tainant

A very good article on the uber corruption.

Understanding Uber: It's Not About The App - London Reconnections


----------



## Tilly

Curious:

*TfL inspectors gave Uber green light ten times*
Graeme Paton, Transport Correspondent | Callum Jones


September 25 2017, 9:00am, The Times





Lyft is Uber’s biggest competitor and may be aiming to set up in LondonALAMY
Uber was repeatedly given a clean bill of health by transport bosses before the sudden decision to ban it from London, _The Times_ has learnt.

Inspections carried out by Transport for London between 2013 and the middle of this year failed to find any major fault with the company, it emerged, leading to claims that the cancellation of its licence smacked of “political opportunism”.

Data released under the Freedom of Information Act showed that TfL conducted ten inspections at Uber’s London headquarters and ruled that it “satisfied regulatory requirements”.

In April Uber also successfully passed its annual compliance audit, which is thought to have involved 20 officials from TfL’s licensing department reviewing thousands of documents over two days.

Uber, which is used by 3.5 million…


TfL inspectors gave Uber green light ten times


----------



## Tilly

More curious:

*Uber claims Sadiq Khan and Tfl have refused to meet the company for talks to get its licence renewed as 700,000 call on the London Mayor to reverse the ban*

*London Mayor Sadiq Khan is under pressure to reverse decision to banish Uber*
*Nearly 700,000 people have signed a petition set up by the controversial app*
*Campaigners warned banning Uber from London would make women less safe*
By James Salmon, Transport Correspondent For The Daily Mail

PUBLISHED: 01:17, 25 September 2017 | UPDATED: 17:36, 25 September 2017


London Mayor Sadiq Khan was last night under growing pressure to reverse the decision to banish Uber from the capital.

Nearly 700,000 people have signed a petition set up by the controversial taxi-hailing smartphone app urging him to back down.

Campaigners yesterday warned that banning Uber in London would make women less safe by forcing them to take public transport and unlicenced taxis late at night.

And Uber tried to back Mr Khan into a corner by signalling it is keen to strike a peace deal and could be willing to offer concessions to improve its drivers' rights.

The US tech firm pleaded to sit down around the negotiating table with the mayor and officials at Transport for London (TfL), which ruled on Friday that Uber is 'not fit and proper' to hold a taxi licence.

Scroll down for video 






+2
London Mayor Sadiq Khan was last night under growing pressure to reverse the decision to banish Uber from the capital



*Uber also claimed that Mr Khan and TfL have refused to meet it for detailed talks, and have not been clear about what it needs to do to ensure its licence is renewed.*

Tom Elvidge, Uber's general manager in London, said; 'We'd like to know what we can do... to sit down and work together to get this right.'

Speaking to the Sunday Times, he added: 'We haven't been asked to make any changes. We'd like to know what we can do. But that requires a dialogue we haven't been able to have.'

TfL declined to comment. A source close to Mr Khan claimed he was not involved in the decision to suspend Uber's licence, arguing this was made by officials working in TfL's licensing section.

*But this received short shrift from Croydon South Tory MP Chris Philp, who said: 'It is disgraceful that Sadiq Khan took away Uber's licence without even bothering to sit down with them and discussing what needs to change first.*

'Clearly there are things that Uber needs to do to improve. But if Mr Khan is serious about improving safety he should have sat down with Uber and told them what they needed to change.

'He appears to have put narrow political interests ahead of the interests of the wider general public.'

*The criticism came as it emerged that Mr Khan's successful campaign to become London Mayor was backed with a £30,000 donation from cab drivers' union GMB, which has spearheaded the fight to ban Uber. .....*



Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...Khan-Tfl-refused-meet-them.html#ixzz4tievqjBu 
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook


----------



## Tommy Tainant

Tilly said:


> More curious:
> 
> *Uber claims Sadiq Khan and Tfl have refused to meet the company for talks to get its licence renewed as 700,000 call on the London Mayor to reverse the ban*
> 
> *London Mayor Sadiq Khan is under pressure to reverse decision to banish Uber*
> *Nearly 700,000 people have signed a petition set up by the controversial app*
> *Campaigners warned banning Uber from London would make women less safe*
> By James Salmon, Transport Correspondent For The Daily Mail
> 
> PUBLISHED: 01:17, 25 September 2017 | UPDATED: 17:36, 25 September 2017
> 
> 
> London Mayor Sadiq Khan was last night under growing pressure to reverse the decision to banish Uber from the capital.
> 
> Nearly 700,000 people have signed a petition set up by the controversial taxi-hailing smartphone app urging him to back down.
> 
> Campaigners yesterday warned that banning Uber in London would make women less safe by forcing them to take public transport and unlicenced taxis late at night.
> 
> And Uber tried to back Mr Khan into a corner by signalling it is keen to strike a peace deal and could be willing to offer concessions to improve its drivers' rights.
> 
> The US tech firm pleaded to sit down around the negotiating table with the mayor and officials at Transport for London (TfL), which ruled on Friday that Uber is 'not fit and proper' to hold a taxi licence.
> 
> Scroll down for video
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> +2
> London Mayor Sadiq Khan was last night under growing pressure to reverse the decision to banish Uber from the capital
> 
> 
> 
> *Uber also claimed that Mr Khan and TfL have refused to meet it for detailed talks, and have not been clear about what it needs to do to ensure its licence is renewed.*
> 
> Tom Elvidge, Uber's general manager in London, said; 'We'd like to know what we can do... to sit down and work together to get this right.'
> 
> Speaking to the Sunday Times, he added: 'We haven't been asked to make any changes. We'd like to know what we can do. But that requires a dialogue we haven't been able to have.'
> 
> TfL declined to comment. A source close to Mr Khan claimed he was not involved in the decision to suspend Uber's licence, arguing this was made by officials working in TfL's licensing section.
> 
> *But this received short shrift from Croydon South Tory MP Chris Philp, who said: 'It is disgraceful that Sadiq Khan took away Uber's licence without even bothering to sit down with them and discussing what needs to change first.*
> 
> 'Clearly there are things that Uber needs to do to improve. But if Mr Khan is serious about improving safety he should have sat down with Uber and told them what they needed to change.
> 
> 'He appears to have put narrow political interests ahead of the interests of the wider general public.'
> 
> *The criticism came as it emerged that Mr Khan's successful campaign to become London Mayor was backed with a £30,000 donation from cab drivers' union GMB, which has spearheaded the fight to ban Uber. .....*
> 
> 
> 
> Read more: Uber claims Sadiq Khan and TfL have refused to meet them | Daily Mail Online
> Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook



Uber bullying kicking in.

*ULL were granted a four-month extension to that licence earlier this year. This was because TfL, who are responsible for regulating taxi services in London, had a number of concerns that ULL might not meet the required standards of operational practice. These are rules that all private hire operators – from the smallest local cab firm to Addison Lee – are required to meet. Issuing a four-month extension rather than a five-year one was intended to provide the time necessary to investigate those issues further.*

They were given a 4 month window to put their house in order and failed to comply. Wankers.


----------



## OnePercenter

gipper said:


> OnePercenter said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> gipper said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> OnePercenter said:
> 
> 
> 
> UBER should be brought down. It's a disorganized company that's business plan is based on illegalities.
> 
> 
> 
> Millions of people rely on Uber and other ride sharing services.  They very much like the convenience and ease of using these services.  Many poor people really like Uber, as they can't afford a car or the high prices of taxis.
> 
> Why do you hate poor people?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> What did those 'millions of people' rely on before rideshare?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Yeah....let's go back to the horse and buggy, because that is what millions relied on before the automobile.
Click to expand...


The issue was before UBER, not the automobile.


----------



## Tommy Tainant

Just a bit more from the article.
*There is still much more to explore on the subject of Uber. Not just Uber London’s particular issues with TfL, but the economics of how they operate and what their future plans might be.

That last part is important because the main element of Uber’s grand narrative – their continued ability to offer low fares – is not as guaranteed a prospect as Londoners (and indeed all users) have been led to believe.

For now, it is simply worth bearing something in mind: Uber’s fares do not cover the actual cost of a journey.

Just how large the deficit is varies by territory and – as the firm don’t disclose more financial information than necessary – it is difficult to know what the shortfall per trip is in London itself. In New York, however, where some 2016 numbers are available, it seems that every journey only covers 41% of the costs involved in making it.

Just why Uber do this is something we will explore another time, but for now it is important just to know it is happening. It means that, without significant changes to Uber’s operational model, the company will never make a profit (indeed it currently loses roughly $2bn a year). As one expert in transport economics writes:
*
We saw a similar thing when our bus routes were deregulated. Stagecoach ran free busses against legitimate companies in order to drive them out of business. In the longer run the consumer loses out as the application of financial might destroys markets. It has nothing to do with offering a better service and everything to do with creating a monopoly.

That is why regulation should instil order on what would just become a jungle.

Uber are prepared to throw £2bn a year at the problem until it wins. Its a huge prize for them.


----------



## OnePercenter

*Uber CEO apologizes to Londoners: 'We got things wrong'*

Uber CEO apologizes to Londoners: 'We got things wrong'


----------



## Tommy Tainant

OnePercenter said:


> *Uber CEO apologizes to Londoners: 'We got things wrong'*
> 
> Uber CEO apologizes to Londoners: 'We got things wrong'


They will say whatever they need to say. However words are cheap, actions are the thing.


----------



## BulletProof

Tommy Tainant said:


> Uber are prepared to throw £2bn a year at the problem until it wins. Its a huge prize for them.



It's always fun to hear the libtard view on things, so thank you for your contribution.  But, I don't think customers are crying because you don't think Uber charges enough.

Your charge is that Uber is being mean to competitors by not charging enough.  The trouble with that theory is that competitors can spring to life the moment Uber ends subsidies, and then the only loser is Uber who spent tons of money on subsidies.

This Uber ban is all about the city government being paid off by the taxi cab companies to squeeze-out ride-sharing competition.  You, not Uber, is the enemy of competition.


----------



## gipper

Tommy Tainant said:


> OnePercenter said:
> 
> 
> 
> *Uber CEO apologizes to Londoners: 'We got things wrong'*
> 
> Uber CEO apologizes to Londoners: 'We got things wrong'
> 
> 
> 
> They will say whatever they need to say. However words are cheap, actions are the thing.
Click to expand...

Mayor Khan is obviously kowtowing to his taxi driver constituents and the revenue they generate for the city.  It is all about the money....and who cares if the citizens are harmed.


----------



## Tommy Tainant

gipper said:


> Tommy Tainant said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> OnePercenter said:
> 
> 
> 
> *Uber CEO apologizes to Londoners: 'We got things wrong'*
> 
> Uber CEO apologizes to Londoners: 'We got things wrong'
> 
> 
> 
> They will say whatever they need to say. However words are cheap, actions are the thing.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Mayor Khan is obviously kowtowing to his taxi driver constituents and the revenue they generate for the city.  It is all about the money....and who cares if the citizens are harmed.
Click to expand...

Well you simplify it as usual. Uber dont pay tax if you study the OP. Why should anyone give a fuck about them ?


----------



## gipper

Tommy Tainant said:


> gipper said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Tommy Tainant said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> OnePercenter said:
> 
> 
> 
> *Uber CEO apologizes to Londoners: 'We got things wrong'*
> 
> Uber CEO apologizes to Londoners: 'We got things wrong'
> 
> 
> 
> They will say whatever they need to say. However words are cheap, actions are the thing.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Mayor Khan is obviously kowtowing to his taxi driver constituents and the revenue they generate for the city.  It is all about the money....and who cares if the citizens are harmed.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Well you simplify it as usual. Uber dont pay tax if you study the OP. Why should anyone give a fuck about them ?
Click to expand...

Spoken like the true statist I always knew you to be.


----------



## Tommy Tainant

gipper said:


> Tommy Tainant said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> gipper said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Tommy Tainant said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> OnePercenter said:
> 
> 
> 
> *Uber CEO apologizes to Londoners: 'We got things wrong'*
> 
> Uber CEO apologizes to Londoners: 'We got things wrong'
> 
> 
> 
> They will say whatever they need to say. However words are cheap, actions are the thing.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Mayor Khan is obviously kowtowing to his taxi driver constituents and the revenue they generate for the city.  It is all about the money....and who cares if the citizens are harmed.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Well you simplify it as usual. Uber dont pay tax if you study the OP. Why should anyone give a fuck about them ?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Spoken like the true statist I always knew you to be.
Click to expand...

Why should Uber be given special privileges ? Because they have a lot of money and thats reason enough for your kind to bend over.


----------



## gipper

Tommy Tainant said:


> gipper said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Tommy Tainant said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> gipper said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Tommy Tainant said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> OnePercenter said:
> 
> 
> 
> *Uber CEO apologizes to Londoners: 'We got things wrong'*
> 
> Uber CEO apologizes to Londoners: 'We got things wrong'
> 
> 
> 
> They will say whatever they need to say. However words are cheap, actions are the thing.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Mayor Khan is obviously kowtowing to his taxi driver constituents and the revenue they generate for the city.  It is all about the money....and who cares if the citizens are harmed.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Well you simplify it as usual. Uber dont pay tax if you study the OP. Why should anyone give a fuck about them ?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Spoken like the true statist I always knew you to be.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Why should Uber be given special privileges ? Because they have a lot of money and thats reason enough for your kind to bend over.
Click to expand...

No...foolish statist.  They were not given special privileges.  

Your love of government is foolish and ignorant.  

Why do you hate Uber drivers who are only trying to make a living?


----------



## Tommy Tainant

gipper said:


> Tommy Tainant said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> gipper said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Tommy Tainant said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> gipper said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Tommy Tainant said:
> 
> 
> 
> They will say whatever they need to say. However words are cheap, actions are the thing.
> 
> 
> 
> Mayor Khan is obviously kowtowing to his taxi driver constituents and the revenue they generate for the city.  It is all about the money....and who cares if the citizens are harmed.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Well you simplify it as usual. Uber dont pay tax if you study the OP. Why should anyone give a fuck about them ?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Spoken like the true statist I always knew you to be.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Why should Uber be given special privileges ? Because they have a lot of money and thats reason enough for your kind to bend over.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> No...foolish statist.  They were not given special privileges.
> 
> Your love of government is foolish and ignorant.
> 
> Why do you hate Uber drivers who are only trying to make a living?
Click to expand...

Uber is the problem ,not its drivers. 
Let me explain.
If you allow them to operate to lower standards than others you give them a competitive advantage.
It really is that simple.


----------



## gipper

Tommy Tainant said:


> gipper said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Tommy Tainant said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> gipper said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Tommy Tainant said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> gipper said:
> 
> 
> 
> Mayor Khan is obviously kowtowing to his taxi driver constituents and the revenue they generate for the city.  It is all about the money....and who cares if the citizens are harmed.
> 
> 
> 
> Well you simplify it as usual. Uber dont pay tax if you study the OP. Why should anyone give a fuck about them ?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Spoken like the true statist I always knew you to be.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Why should Uber be given special privileges ? Because they have a lot of money and thats reason enough for your kind to bend over.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> No...foolish statist.  They were not given special privileges.
> 
> Your love of government is foolish and ignorant.
> 
> Why do you hate Uber drivers who are only trying to make a living?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Uber is the problem ,not its drivers.
> Let me explain.
> If you allow them to operate to lower standards than others you give them a competitive advantage.
> It really is that simple.
Click to expand...

If only you could understand that the State you so adore, is a criminal operation.  Everything the corrupt State does is for it's benefit.  This banning of Uber is a perfect example of this, but I do not expect you to comprehend.


----------



## BulletProof

Tommy Tainant said:


> Uber is the problem ,not its drivers.
> Let me explain.
> If you allow them to operate to lower standards than others you give them a competitive advantage.
> It really is that simple.



No one has demonstrated that Uber was being held to lower standards, as we haven't been provided data concerning the taxi cab companies, nor for the other ride sharing services.

Further, the whole banning thing on vague demands stinks to high heaven of bullsh1t.  How about fining Uber, not banning them, until specific acts of compliance is reached?

This is nothing but a crusade to benefit the old taxi companies.


----------



## Tommy Tainant

BulletProof said:


> Tommy Tainant said:
> 
> 
> 
> Uber is the problem ,not its drivers.
> Let me explain.
> If you allow them to operate to lower standards than others you give them a competitive advantage.
> It really is that simple.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> No one has demonstrated that Uber was being held to lower standards, as we haven't been provided data concerning the taxi cab companies, nor for the other ride sharing services.
> 
> Further, the whole banning thing on vague demands stinks to high heaven of bullsh1t.  How about fining Uber, not banning them, until specific acts of compliance is reached?
> 
> This is nothing but a crusade to benefit the old taxi companies.
Click to expand...

Oh dear.
Read up on this.
You will see that they have been given every chance to sort themselves out. 
They havent bothered to do so.


----------



## gipper

Tommy Tainant said:


> BulletProof said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Tommy Tainant said:
> 
> 
> 
> Uber is the problem ,not its drivers.
> Let me explain.
> If you allow them to operate to lower standards than others you give them a competitive advantage.
> It really is that simple.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> No one has demonstrated that Uber was being held to lower standards, as we haven't been provided data concerning the taxi cab companies, nor for the other ride sharing services.
> 
> Further, the whole banning thing on vague demands stinks to high heaven of bullsh1t.  How about fining Uber, not banning them, until specific acts of compliance is reached?
> 
> This is nothing but a crusade to benefit the old taxi companies.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Oh dear.
> Read up on this.
> You will see that they have been given every chance to sort themselves out.
> They havent bothered to do so.
Click to expand...

So fine them. Don't ban them, unless maybe that was the plan all along.


----------



## BulletProof

35 complaints of sexual assault out of 15 million rides seems negligible.  I'm sure in NY, blacks mug taxi drivers at a thousand times that frequency.


----------



## Tommy Tainant

gipper said:


> Tommy Tainant said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BulletProof said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Tommy Tainant said:
> 
> 
> 
> Uber is the problem ,not its drivers.
> Let me explain.
> If you allow them to operate to lower standards than others you give them a competitive advantage.
> It really is that simple.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> No one has demonstrated that Uber was being held to lower standards, as we haven't been provided data concerning the taxi cab companies, nor for the other ride sharing services.
> 
> Further, the whole banning thing on vague demands stinks to high heaven of bullsh1t.  How about fining Uber, not banning them, until specific acts of compliance is reached?
> 
> This is nothing but a crusade to benefit the old taxi companies.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Oh dear.
> Read up on this.
> You will see that they have been given every chance to sort themselves out.
> They havent bothered to do so.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> So fine them. Don't ban them, unless maybe that was the plan all along.
Click to expand...

Their license ran out in May and they were given a four month extension to sort themselves out.
But they didnt.
Maybe they thought that they were too big to be punished ? 
And now they know where they stand.


----------



## BulletProof

Tommy Tainant said:


> Their license ran out in May and they were given a four month extension to sort themselves out.
> But they didnt.
> Maybe they thought that they were too big to be punished ?
> And now they know where they stand.



What, specifically, was Uber suppose to do those four months?


----------



## Tilly

BulletProof said:


> Tommy Tainant said:
> 
> 
> 
> So fine them. Don't ban them, unless maybe that was the plan all along.
> 
> 
> 
> Their license ran out in May and they were given a four month extension to sort themselves out.
> But they didnt.
> Maybe they thought that they were too big to be punished ?
> And now they know where they stand.
Click to expand...


What, specifically, was Uber suppose to do those four months?[/QUOTE]

Uber had 10 audits by TFL and passed every one.

Khan received financial backing from the black cab union for his mayoral campaign and has simply done their bidding - they don't like the competition nor the threat to the exorbitant prices they charge customers.

Khan likes banning things - one of his first acts as mayor was to ban bikini ads on the underground!

He has told the world London is closed to business and innovation.

This sums him up:

Tom Tugendhat @TomTugendhat

Labour Luddite @SadiqKhan wants to switch off the internet. @Uber is just one example of how the internet liberates and Gov cannot control.
11:24 am · 22 Sep 2017


----------



## Tilly

gipper said:


> Tommy Tainant said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BulletProof said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Tommy Tainant said:
> 
> 
> 
> Uber is the problem ,not its drivers.
> Let me explain.
> If you allow them to operate to lower standards than others you give them a competitive advantage.
> It really is that simple.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> No one has demonstrated that Uber was being held to lower standards, as we haven't been provided data concerning the taxi cab companies, nor for the other ride sharing services.
> 
> Further, the whole banning thing on vague demands stinks to high heaven of bullsh1t.  How about fining Uber, not banning them, until specific acts of compliance is reached?
> 
> This is nothing but a crusade to benefit the old taxi companies.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Oh dear.
> Read up on this.
> You will see that they have been given every chance to sort themselves out.
> They havent bothered to do so.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> So fine them. Don't ban them, unless maybe that was the plan all along.
Click to expand...

It was. Khan campaigned against uber as Mayoral candidate and received financial backing from the black cab union.


----------



## Tommy Tainant

BulletProof said:


> Tommy Tainant said:
> 
> 
> 
> Their license ran out in May and they were given a four month extension to sort themselves out.
> But they didnt.
> Maybe they thought that they were too big to be punished ?
> And now they know where they stand.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What, specifically, was Uber suppose to do those four months?
Click to expand...

Comply.


----------



## Tilly

Not only did Khan receive funding for his mayoral campaign from the black cab union, but TFL are not to be trusted either:

*UK minicab drivers claim TfL is 'hiding data on sexual assaults in taxis' - and they are demanding the truth*






By Mary-Ann RussonUpdated  February 22, 2016 10:34 GMT   


A union claims that TfL is hiding important statistics on how many women are sexually assaulted in taxis, as part of a wider problem discriminating against minicab drivers
Minicab drivers say Transport for London (TfL) is withholding information on the number of women who are sexually assaulted when they get into taxi cabs. The drivers want the data to be made public to help fix the problem, and to end what they say is a campaign of discrimination against them.

The United Private Hire Drivers (UPHD) union, which represents 2,000 minicab drivers (including some Uber drivers), is calling on TfL to release data on the number of sexual assault incidents occurring across the London taxi industry on both London cabs and private hire vehicles, and has even started a Change.org petitionabout the issue.

UPHD launched the petition after seeing a post from the London Cab Drivers Club (LCDC) on Twitter on 13 February that listed statistics on sexual offences related to private hire drivers in 2015. LCDC asserted in its tweet that TfL doesn't want these figures released, and UPHD has discovered that this information is only being given to taxi trade unions, but not to the general public....

However, the private hire drivers feel that they are being unfairly singled out, and that *TfL has been leaking out bits of the sexual assault data every now and then in order to help black cab unions in their campaigns to besmirch the reputations of minicab drivers.*


"TfL has regular meetings with taxi organisation bosses and private hire bosses. TfL has been sharing crime statistics from the cab enforcement unit in the Metropolitan Police. Those crime stats were given to that group in confidence and TfL gagged them, but these stats have been leaked selectively by the cab companies. *They peel off their own stats and they start leaking out the private hire car stats when it suits them," James Farrar, a co-founder of the UPHD union, told IBTimes UK.*




"TfL shouldn't be giving sex assault stats to a trade body. It's not a trade issue, it's a public safety issue. You cannot manage sex crimes by keeping it quiet. This isn't a trade issue – it has nothing to do with our dispute between Uber and the black cabs, or how Uber drivers are treated."




*Data seemingly leaked from various sources*
After seeing LCDC's tweet on 13 February, Farrar decided to contact TfL to ask them why they refused to release the data on sexual assaults in private hire vehicles, but had given it to a black cab union instead. TfL's taxi and private hire senior relationship manager, Silka Kennedy-Todd, responded to Farrar by saying that *the data referred to by LCDC was "unverified":....


UK minicab drivers claim TfL is 'hiding data on sexual assaults in taxis' - and they are demanding the truth*


----------



## Tilly

*TfL accused of using 'bogus' charge to strip Uber of its licence*

JONATHAN MITCHELL 
2 days ago
Transport for London has been accused of using “bogus” politically motivated reasons to revoke Uber’s licence to operate in the capital...

...
*But the Financial Times reported that TfL is responsible for checking the backgrounds of drivers, sparking accusations the charge was “bogus”.*

_




Uber has been stripped of its licence in London (Getty Images)
A spokesman for TfL said it would not comment on specifics of background checks while TfL considers Uber's appeal.

James Farrar, an Uber driver and representative of the United Private Hire Drivers trade body, told the FT the system had been politicised.


He said: “To me this reeks. It’s a bogus charge from TfL. Uber will be able to remedy this in court immediately because DBS (disclosure and barring service) and medical certification are prerequisites for drivers getting their licences from TfL.”

A source close to Uber also told the paper: “A lot of people don’t know that drivers are background-checked and licensed by TfL.

“Uber does not get a say on who gets licensed in the capital. Without the TfL licence, they can’t come and drive on the Uber app.”...

TfL accused of using 'bogus' charge to strip Uber of its licence_


----------



## Tommy Tainant

Tilly said:


> *TfL accused of using 'bogus' charge to strip Uber of its licence*
> 
> JONATHAN MITCHELL
> 2 days ago
> Transport for London has been accused of using “bogus” politically motivated reasons to revoke Uber’s licence to operate in the capital...
> 
> ...
> *But the Financial Times reported that TfL is responsible for checking the backgrounds of drivers, sparking accusations the charge was “bogus”.*
> 
> _
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Uber has been stripped of its licence in London (Getty Images)
> A spokesman for TfL said it would not comment on specifics of background checks while TfL considers Uber's appeal.
> 
> James Farrar, an Uber driver and representative of the United Private Hire Drivers trade body, told the FT the system had been politicised.
> 
> 
> He said: “To me this reeks. It’s a bogus charge from TfL. Uber will be able to remedy this in court immediately because DBS (disclosure and barring service) and medical certification are prerequisites for drivers getting their licences from TfL.”
> 
> A source close to Uber also told the paper: “A lot of people don’t know that drivers are background-checked and licensed by TfL.
> 
> “Uber does not get a say on who gets licensed in the capital. Without the TfL licence, they can’t come and drive on the Uber app.”...
> 
> TfL accused of using 'bogus' charge to strip Uber of its licence_


Well it will all come out in court wont it ? Lets be honest about this Tilly. Your only interest in this is to use it to beat Mayor Khan. Primarily because he is a muslim. Your comments lack any credibility.


----------



## Tilly

Tommy Tainant said:


> Tilly said:
> 
> 
> 
> *TfL accused of using 'bogus' charge to strip Uber of its licence*
> 
> JONATHAN MITCHELL
> 2 days ago
> Transport for London has been accused of using “bogus” politically motivated reasons to revoke Uber’s licence to operate in the capital...
> 
> ...
> *But the Financial Times reported that TfL is responsible for checking the backgrounds of drivers, sparking accusations the charge was “bogus”.*
> 
> _
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Uber has been stripped of its licence in London (Getty Images)
> A spokesman for TfL said it would not comment on specifics of background checks while TfL considers Uber's appeal.
> 
> James Farrar, an Uber driver and representative of the United Private Hire Drivers trade body, told the FT the system had been politicised.
> 
> 
> He said: “To me this reeks. It’s a bogus charge from TfL. Uber will be able to remedy this in court immediately because DBS (disclosure and barring service) and medical certification are prerequisites for drivers getting their licences from TfL.”
> 
> A source close to Uber also told the paper: “A lot of people don’t know that drivers are background-checked and licensed by TfL.
> 
> “Uber does not get a say on who gets licensed in the capital. Without the TfL licence, they can’t come and drive on the Uber app.”...
> 
> TfL accused of using 'bogus' charge to strip Uber of its licence_
> 
> 
> 
> Well it will all come out in court wont it ? Lets be honest about this Tilly. Your only interest in this is to use it to beat Mayor Khan. Primarily because he is a muslim. Your comments lack any credibility.
Click to expand...

Let's be honest about this, Tammy. It's a small minded stupid backward decision - but you like it because it is against business, it is against innovation, and it is against people who are wealthier than you 
I've also noticed before that you seem to enjoy people losing their livelihoods if it fits in any way with your commie agenda.

I, and a great many women on the other hand, have many concerns over this decision, Mayor Khans role in it comes as no surprise to me at all as I expect very little in the way of sensible decision making from him after the bikini ad ban and the Islamic proselysing ads he allowed on London buses.

But I am also concerned about TFLs dodgy dealings and the way they have ensured the leaking of unverified and partial data about sexual assaults when they haven't been concerned about the fact that such assaults have occurred for decades before Uber appeared on the scene.

Also, women will be made less safe by this decision as they return to using unlicensed cabs at night when they can't afford Black Cabs and the underground doesn't run to where they live. Your journey in an Uber cab could be tracked by family/friends and details such as the  name and address of the driver etc are known.  Have you tried getting about London late at night/early morning? It's not much fun and TFL haven't done much to make the underground safe at night either. Why on earth do you think Uber is so popular?

I'm also not thrilled about putting 40,000 people out of work on the spurious basis of safety, particularly when the figures for black cabs etc are not compared and the underground is so unsafe.
It was clealry a decision to protect the black cabs and their outrageous prices and Khan owed them. I suspect he and TFL will end up with egg on their faces.


----------



## Tilly

Tommy Tainant said:


> Well it will all come out in court wont it ?



Yes it will, and that's why it's silly of you to be so prematurely excited 
But what's new?


----------



## gipper

Tommy Tainant said:


> Tilly said:
> 
> 
> 
> *TfL accused of using 'bogus' charge to strip Uber of its licence*
> 
> JONATHAN MITCHELL
> 2 days ago
> Transport for London has been accused of using “bogus” politically motivated reasons to revoke Uber’s licence to operate in the capital...
> 
> ...
> *But the Financial Times reported that TfL is responsible for checking the backgrounds of drivers, sparking accusations the charge was “bogus”.*
> 
> _
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Uber has been stripped of its licence in London (Getty Images)
> A spokesman for TfL said it would not comment on specifics of background checks while TfL considers Uber's appeal.
> 
> James Farrar, an Uber driver and representative of the United Private Hire Drivers trade body, told the FT the system had been politicised.
> 
> 
> He said: “To me this reeks. It’s a bogus charge from TfL. Uber will be able to remedy this in court immediately because DBS (disclosure and barring service) and medical certification are prerequisites for drivers getting their licences from TfL.”
> 
> A source close to Uber also told the paper: “A lot of people don’t know that drivers are background-checked and licensed by TfL.
> 
> “Uber does not get a say on who gets licensed in the capital. Without the TfL licence, they can’t come and drive on the Uber app.”...
> 
> TfL accused of using 'bogus' charge to strip Uber of its licence_
> 
> 
> 
> Well it will all come out in court wont it ? Lets be honest about this Tilly. Your only interest in this is to use it to beat Mayor Khan. Primarily because he is a muslim. Your comments lack any credibility.
Click to expand...

You have it backwards,as usual.  You support Khan because he is a Muslim and a public official.


----------



## Muhammed

Tommy Tainant said:


> Uber deserved to lose its licence – Londoners’ safety must come first | Sadiq Khan
> 
> Safety concerns.


FUCK!


----------



## Tilly

gipper said:


> Tommy Tainant said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Tilly said:
> 
> 
> 
> *TfL accused of using 'bogus' charge to strip Uber of its licence*
> 
> JONATHAN MITCHELL
> 2 days ago
> Transport for London has been accused of using “bogus” politically motivated reasons to revoke Uber’s licence to operate in the capital...
> 
> ...
> *But the Financial Times reported that TfL is responsible for checking the backgrounds of drivers, sparking accusations the charge was “bogus”.*
> 
> _
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Uber has been stripped of its licence in London (Getty Images)
> A spokesman for TfL said it would not comment on specifics of background checks while TfL considers Uber's appeal.
> 
> James Farrar, an Uber driver and representative of the United Private Hire Drivers trade body, told the FT the system had been politicised.
> 
> 
> He said: “To me this reeks. It’s a bogus charge from TfL. Uber will be able to remedy this in court immediately because DBS (disclosure and barring service) and medical certification are prerequisites for drivers getting their licences from TfL.”
> 
> A source close to Uber also told the paper: “A lot of people don’t know that drivers are background-checked and licensed by TfL.
> 
> “Uber does not get a say on who gets licensed in the capital. Without the TfL licence, they can’t come and drive on the Uber app.”...
> 
> TfL accused of using 'bogus' charge to strip Uber of its licence_
> 
> 
> 
> Well it will all come out in court wont it ? Lets be honest about this Tilly. Your only interest in this is to use it to beat Mayor Khan. Primarily because he is a muslim. Your comments lack any credibility.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> You have it backwards,as usual.  You support Khan because he is a Muslim and a public official.
Click to expand...

Bingo!


----------



## frigidweirdo

It's interesting because Uber has threatened to pull out of Quebec, and the reasons they've threatened to pull out are that it would have to comply with regulations akin to taxi drivers.

Uber Says It Will Leave Quebec Rather Than Face New Rules

On the one hand they're grovelling to London saying how they'll accept more regulation, on the other they're threatening Quebec with a pullout for the same regulations they want in London. Quebec should tell them to get stuffed.


----------



## PraiseKek

Tommy Tainant said:


> Uber deserved to lose its licence – Londoners’ safety must come first | Sadiq Khan
> 
> Safety concerns.



Safety for the government taxes for taxi medallions or whatever the British call them.


----------



## PraiseKek

Tipsycatlover said:


> gipper said:
> 
> 
> 
> Because those taxi drivers are so much safer.
> 
> LMFAO.
> 
> Yet another example of big government corruption and you support it.
> 
> 
> 
> Evidently, yes the taxis are safer.
Click to expand...


According to who?


----------



## gipper

PraiseKek said:


> Tipsycatlover said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> gipper said:
> 
> 
> 
> Because those taxi drivers are so much safer.
> 
> LMFAO.
> 
> Yet another example of big government corruption and you support it.
> 
> 
> 
> Evidently, yes the taxis are safer.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> According to who?
Click to expand...

According to the government...no doubt, and they tend to lie a lot, but dupes can't see it.

It looks like they purposely are hiding crimes committed by taxis/black cars, to cover up their crime.


----------



## BulletProof

frigidweirdo said:


> It's interesting because Uber has threatened to pull out of Quebec, and the reasons they've threatened to pull out are that it would have to comply with regulations akin to taxi drivers.
> 
> Uber Says It Will Leave Quebec Rather Than Face New Rules
> 
> On the one hand they're grovelling to London saying how they'll accept more regulation, on the other they're threatening Quebec with a pullout for the same regulations they want in London. Quebec should tell them to get stuffed.



You must be a faggot with a bondage fetish. Quibec's rules are designed to stifle new competition against existing taxi companies, a less blatant form of New York's taxi medallions.  Do, you think it takes 35 hours to learn how to drive a car you already know how to drive, or whatever it is that's suppose to fill those 35 hours.  Maybe for you, as you appear to be very ignorant.  That 35 hours and all the other oppressive regulation....

Quebec is the only Canadian provence that requires training.  Isn't it amazing how Uber drivers manage to do their part-time ride-sharing in the rest of Canada, without training?


----------



## Tommy Tainant

gipper said:


> PraiseKek said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Tipsycatlover said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> gipper said:
> 
> 
> 
> Because those taxi drivers are so much safer.
> 
> LMFAO.
> 
> Yet another example of big government corruption and you support it.
> 
> 
> 
> Evidently, yes the taxis are safer.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> According to who?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> According to the government...no doubt, and they tend to lie a lot, but dupes can't see it.
> 
> It looks like they purposely are hiding crimes committed by taxis/black cars, to cover up their crime.
Click to expand...

You need to back these claims up with some facts.
Why do you feel that Uber should be exempt from the rules that all the other firms are obliged to observe ?


----------



## Darkwind

Tommy Tainant said:


> Uber deserved to lose its licence – Londoners’ safety must come first | Sadiq Khan
> 
> Safety concerns.


Londoner's safety must come first, yet you still have a wide-open immigration policy.   Can't make this stuff up.


----------



## gipper

Tommy Tainant said:


> gipper said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PraiseKek said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Tipsycatlover said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> gipper said:
> 
> 
> 
> Because those taxi drivers are so much safer.
> 
> LMFAO.
> 
> Yet another example of big government corruption and you support it.
> 
> 
> 
> Evidently, yes the taxis are safer.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> According to who?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> According to the government...no doubt, and they tend to lie a lot, but dupes can't see it.
> 
> It looks like they purposely are hiding crimes committed by taxis/black cars, to cover up their crime.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> You need to back these claims up with some facts.
> Why do you feel that Uber should be exempt from the rules that all the other firms are obliged to observe ?
Click to expand...

Why do you think the City of London is covering up bad actions by taxi and black car drivers?


----------



## Tommy Tainant

gipper said:


> Tommy Tainant said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> gipper said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PraiseKek said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Tipsycatlover said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> gipper said:
> 
> 
> 
> Because those taxi drivers are so much safer.
> 
> LMFAO.
> 
> Yet another example of big government corruption and you support it.
> 
> 
> 
> Evidently, yes the taxis are safer.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> According to who?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> According to the government...no doubt, and they tend to lie a lot, but dupes can't see it.
> 
> It looks like they purposely are hiding crimes committed by taxis/black cars, to cover up their crime.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> You need to back these claims up with some facts.
> Why do you feel that Uber should be exempt from the rules that all the other firms are obliged to observe ?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Why do you think the City of London is covering up bad actions by taxi and black car drivers?
Click to expand...

Show me the evidence.
BTW the City Of London is not the same thing as London.


----------



## gipper

Tommy Tainant said:


> gipper said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Tommy Tainant said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> gipper said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PraiseKek said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Tipsycatlover said:
> 
> 
> 
> Evidently, yes the taxis are safer.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> According to who?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> According to the government...no doubt, and they tend to lie a lot, but dupes can't see it.
> 
> It looks like they purposely are hiding crimes committed by taxis/black cars, to cover up their crime.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> You need to back these claims up with some facts.
> Why do you feel that Uber should be exempt from the rules that all the other firms are obliged to observe ?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Why do you think the City of London is covering up bad actions by taxi and black car drivers?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Show me the evidence.
> BTW the City Of London is not the same thing as London.
Click to expand...


It was posted in this thread.


----------



## Tommy Tainant

gipper said:


> Tommy Tainant said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> gipper said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Tommy Tainant said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> gipper said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PraiseKek said:
> 
> 
> 
> According to who?
> 
> 
> 
> According to the government...no doubt, and they tend to lie a lot, but dupes can't see it.
> 
> It looks like they purposely are hiding crimes committed by taxis/black cars, to cover up their crime.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> You need to back these claims up with some facts.
> Why do you feel that Uber should be exempt from the rules that all the other firms are obliged to observe ?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Why do you think the City of London is covering up bad actions by taxi and black car drivers?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Show me the evidence.
> BTW the City Of London is not the same thing as London.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> It was posted in this thread.
Click to expand...

Nope, cant see anything to back up your claims.


----------



## gipper

Tommy Tainant said:


> gipper said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Tommy Tainant said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> gipper said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Tommy Tainant said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> gipper said:
> 
> 
> 
> According to the government...no doubt, and they tend to lie a lot, but dupes can't see it.
> 
> It looks like they purposely are hiding crimes committed by taxis/black cars, to cover up their crime.
> 
> 
> 
> You need to back these claims up with some facts.
> Why do you feel that Uber should be exempt from the rules that all the other firms are obliged to observe ?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Why do you think the City of London is covering up bad actions by taxi and black car drivers?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Show me the evidence.
> BTW the City Of London is not the same thing as London.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> It was posted in this thread.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Nope, cant see anything to back up your claims.
Click to expand...

That's because you are a statist idiot.


----------



## Tommy Tainant

gipper said:


> Tommy Tainant said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> gipper said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Tommy Tainant said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> gipper said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Tommy Tainant said:
> 
> 
> 
> You need to back these claims up with some facts.
> Why do you feel that Uber should be exempt from the rules that all the other firms are obliged to observe ?
> 
> 
> 
> Why do you think the City of London is covering up bad actions by taxi and black car drivers?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Show me the evidence.
> BTW the City Of London is not the same thing as London.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> It was posted in this thread.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Nope, cant see anything to back up your claims.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> That's because you are a statist idiot.
Click to expand...

And you want to give uber an unfair leg up for some conspiracy theory you cant abck up.


----------



## frigidweirdo

BulletProof said:


> frigidweirdo said:
> 
> 
> 
> It's interesting because Uber has threatened to pull out of Quebec, and the reasons they've threatened to pull out are that it would have to comply with regulations akin to taxi drivers.
> 
> Uber Says It Will Leave Quebec Rather Than Face New Rules
> 
> On the one hand they're grovelling to London saying how they'll accept more regulation, on the other they're threatening Quebec with a pullout for the same regulations they want in London. Quebec should tell them to get stuffed.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You must be a faggot with a bondage fetish. Quibec's rules are designed to stifle new competition against existing taxi companies, a less blatant form of New York's taxi medallions.  Do, you think it takes 35 hours to learn how to drive a car you already know how to drive, or whatever it is that's suppose to fill those 35 hours.  Maybe for you, as you appear to be very ignorant.  That 35 hours and all the other oppressive regulation....
> 
> Quebec is the only Canadian provence that requires training.  Isn't it amazing how Uber drivers manage to do their part-time ride-sharing in the rest of Canada, without training?
Click to expand...


Ignore list.


----------



## PraiseKek

Tommy Tainant said:


> gipper said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Tommy Tainant said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> gipper said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PraiseKek said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Tipsycatlover said:
> 
> 
> 
> Evidently, yes the taxis are safer.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> According to who?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> According to the government...no doubt, and they tend to lie a lot, but dupes can't see it.
> 
> It looks like they purposely are hiding crimes committed by taxis/black cars, to cover up their crime.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> You need to back these claims up with some facts.
> Why do you feel that Uber should be exempt from the rules that all the other firms are obliged to observe ?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Why do you think the City of London is covering up bad actions by taxi and black car drivers?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Show me the evidence.
> BTW the City Of London is not the same thing as London.
Click to expand...


Show me the evidence that Ubers are less safe than Cabs.  This is about one thing and one thing only, the millions of Pounds collected by the city of London in Taxi licensing fees, anyone who believes differently is deluding themselves.


----------



## Tommy Tainant

PraiseKek said:


> Tommy Tainant said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> gipper said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Tommy Tainant said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> gipper said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PraiseKek said:
> 
> 
> 
> According to who?
> 
> 
> 
> According to the government...no doubt, and they tend to lie a lot, but dupes can't see it.
> 
> It looks like they purposely are hiding crimes committed by taxis/black cars, to cover up their crime.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> You need to back these claims up with some facts.
> Why do you feel that Uber should be exempt from the rules that all the other firms are obliged to observe ?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Why do you think the City of London is covering up bad actions by taxi and black car drivers?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Show me the evidence.
> BTW the City Of London is not the same thing as London.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Show me the evidence that Ubers are less safe than Cabs.  This is about one thing and one thing only, the millions of Pounds collected by the city of London in Taxi licensing fees, anyone who believes differently is deluding themselves.
Click to expand...

TFL have the evidence and have acted on it. They would not take this decision lightly due to the high level of scrutiny.

These restrictions are standard to all drivers and Uber have been flouing them.

*Convictions*
*If you have any of the following convictions, it's unlikely that your application will be successful. Before submitting an application, please consider: *

*Any conviction for a major violent offence (murder, manslaughter etc)*
*Whether you have more than one conviction of any type of violent offence in the last 10 years*
*If you are still serving a custodial sentence, even if you have been released early on licence or the sentence was suspended*
*If you have been convicted, cautioned or subjected to any other penalty for a serious sexual offence (rape, indecent assault, trafficking, possession of indecent images etc)*
*Whether you have been convicted, cautioned or subjected to any other penalty for more than one sexual offence of any type, irrespective of age*
*Whether you are listed on either the Children's or Adults' barred list*
*If you have been convicted, cautioned or subjected to any other penalty for touting in the last 12 months or have more than one penalty for touting in the last five years*
_*Please be advised that this is not an exhaustive list, licensing decisions are made on a case by case basis.*_

Its not a huge hurdle for them to climb is it ?


----------



## PraiseKek

Tommy Tainant said:


> PraiseKek said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Tommy Tainant said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> gipper said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Tommy Tainant said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> gipper said:
> 
> 
> 
> According to the government...no doubt, and they tend to lie a lot, but dupes can't see it.
> 
> It looks like they purposely are hiding crimes committed by taxis/black cars, to cover up their crime.
> 
> 
> 
> You need to back these claims up with some facts.
> Why do you feel that Uber should be exempt from the rules that all the other firms are obliged to observe ?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Why do you think the City of London is covering up bad actions by taxi and black car drivers?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Show me the evidence.
> BTW the City Of London is not the same thing as London.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Show me the evidence that Ubers are less safe than Cabs.  This is about one thing and one thing only, the millions of Pounds collected by the city of London in Taxi licensing fees, anyone who believes differently is deluding themselves.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> TFL have the evidence and have acted on it. They would not take this decision lightly due to the high level of scrutiny.
> 
> These restrictions are standard to all drivers and Uber have been flouing them.
> 
> *Convictions*
> *If you have any of the following convictions, it's unlikely that your application will be successful. Before submitting an application, please consider: *
> 
> *Any conviction for a major violent offence (murder, manslaughter etc)*
> *Whether you have more than one conviction of any type of violent offence in the last 10 years*
> *If you are still serving a custodial sentence, even if you have been released early on licence or the sentence was suspended*
> *If you have been convicted, cautioned or subjected to any other penalty for a serious sexual offence (rape, indecent assault, trafficking, possession of indecent images etc)*
> *Whether you have been convicted, cautioned or subjected to any other penalty for more than one sexual offence of any type, irrespective of age*
> *Whether you are listed on either the Children's or Adults' barred list*
> *If you have been convicted, cautioned or subjected to any other penalty for touting in the last 12 months or have more than one penalty for touting in the last five years*
> _*Please be advised that this is not an exhaustive list, licensing decisions are made on a case by case basis.*_
> 
> Its not a huge hurdle for them to climb is it ?
Click to expand...


How do we know Uber doesn't do background checks?


----------



## BulletProof

PraiseKek said:


> How do we know Uber doesn't do background checks?



I have no doubt Uber does background checks where the law requires.  In Quebec, the anti-Uber lobby is wanting to require Uber to do background checks through the police instead of through private firms, even though a criminal record is the same criminal record, no matter who pulls it.


----------



## Tommy Tainant

BulletProof said:


> PraiseKek said:
> 
> 
> 
> How do we know Uber doesn't do background checks?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I have no doubt Uber does background checks where the law requires.  In Quebec, the anti-Uber lobby is wanting to require Uber to do background checks through the police instead of through private firms, even though a criminal record is the same criminal record, no matter who pulls it.
Click to expand...


No they dont do the checks.
Here is the list of issues.
*
Its approach to reporting serious criminal offences.

Its approach to how medical certificates are obtained.

Its approach to how Enhanced Disclosure and Barring Service (DBS) checks are obtained.

Its approach to explaining the use of Greyball in London - software that could be used to block regulatory bodies from gaining full access to the app and prevent officials from undertaking regulatory or law enforcement duties.*

Uber will cut any corner to make more money. They are a rogue operator.


----------



## BulletProof

Tommy Tainant said:


> No they dont do the checks.
> Here is the list of issues.
> *
> Its approach to reporting serious criminal offences.
> 
> Its approach to how medical certificates are obtained.
> 
> Its approach to how Enhanced Disclosure and Barring Service (DBS) checks are obtained.
> 
> Its approach to explaining the use of Greyball in London - software that could be used to block regulatory bodies from gaining full access to the app and prevent officials from undertaking regulatory or law enforcement duties.*
> 
> Uber will cut any corner to make more money. They are a rogue operator.



I have an IQ of like 500, and I still can't figure out where what you posted says Uber is violating a law requiring background check.  "Its approach..." is vague and meaningless.


----------



## HenryBHough

You UK neo-Commiunists, yes you, Tainted One,  are about to make Corbyn PM and nationalize everything so you can go out on strike 24/7/365 and collect free money in compensation for the lost work.  Until, of course, other  people's money runs out.


----------



## onaquest

Tommy Tainant said:


> BulletProof said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PraiseKek said:
> 
> 
> 
> How do we know Uber doesn't do background checks?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I have no doubt Uber does background checks where the law requires.  In Quebec, the anti-Uber lobby is wanting to require Uber to do background checks through the police instead of through private firms, even though a criminal record is the same criminal record, no matter who pulls it.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> No they dont do the checks.
> Here is the list of issues.
> *
> Its approach to reporting serious criminal offences.
> 
> Its approach to how medical certificates are obtained.
> 
> Its approach to how Enhanced Disclosure and Barring Service (DBS) checks are obtained.
> 
> Its approach to explaining the use of Greyball in London - software that could be used to block regulatory bodies from gaining full access to the app and prevent officials from undertaking regulatory or law enforcement duties.*
> 
> Uber will cut any corner to make more money. They are a rogue operator.
Click to expand...


Agree! Uber is taking the concept of disruption and applying it to governments. corporations don't and should never make the rules. we vote people into government that do that not companies looking to take our money.


----------



## onaquest

gipper said:


> Tommy Tainant said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> gipper said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PraiseKek said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Tipsycatlover said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> gipper said:
> 
> 
> 
> Because those taxi drivers are so much safer.
> 
> LMFAO.
> 
> Yet another example of big government corruption and you support it.
> 
> 
> 
> Evidently, yes the taxis are safer.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> According to who?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> According to the government...no doubt, and they tend to lie a lot, but dupes can't see it.
> 
> It looks like they purposely are hiding crimes committed by taxis/black cars, to cover up their crime.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> You need to back these claims up with some facts.
> Why do you feel that Uber should be exempt from the rules that all the other firms are obliged to observe ?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Why do you think the City of London is covering up bad actions by taxi and black car drivers?
Click to expand...


i'd like to see you back that up your claim that TfL are covering for Taxis. Facts speak for themselves.

Uber drivers accused of 32 rapes and sex attacks in London over the past year


----------



## frigidweirdo

onaquest said:


> Tommy Tainant said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BulletProof said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PraiseKek said:
> 
> 
> 
> How do we know Uber doesn't do background checks?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I have no doubt Uber does background checks where the law requires.  In Quebec, the anti-Uber lobby is wanting to require Uber to do background checks through the police instead of through private firms, even though a criminal record is the same criminal record, no matter who pulls it.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> No they dont do the checks.
> Here is the list of issues.
> *
> Its approach to reporting serious criminal offences.
> 
> Its approach to how medical certificates are obtained.
> 
> Its approach to how Enhanced Disclosure and Barring Service (DBS) checks are obtained.
> 
> Its approach to explaining the use of Greyball in London - software that could be used to block regulatory bodies from gaining full access to the app and prevent officials from undertaking regulatory or law enforcement duties.*
> 
> Uber will cut any corner to make more money. They are a rogue operator.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Agree! Uber is taking the concept of disruption and applying it to governments. corporations don't and should never make the rules. we vote people into government that do that not companies looking to take our money.
Click to expand...


No, they shouldn't, but in the US it seems to be the norm for larger companies.


----------



## onaquest

frigidweirdo said:


> onaquest said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Tommy Tainant said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BulletProof said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PraiseKek said:
> 
> 
> 
> How do we know Uber doesn't do background checks?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I have no doubt Uber does background checks where the law requires.  In Quebec, the anti-Uber lobby is wanting to require Uber to do background checks through the police instead of through private firms, even though a criminal record is the same criminal record, no matter who pulls it.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> No they dont do the checks.
> Here is the list of issues.
> *
> Its approach to reporting serious criminal offences.
> 
> Its approach to how medical certificates are obtained.
> 
> Its approach to how Enhanced Disclosure and Barring Service (DBS) checks are obtained.
> 
> Its approach to explaining the use of Greyball in London - software that could be used to block regulatory bodies from gaining full access to the app and prevent officials from undertaking regulatory or law enforcement duties.*
> 
> Uber will cut any corner to make more money. They are a rogue operator.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Agree! Uber is taking the concept of disruption and applying it to governments. corporations don't and should never make the rules. we vote people into government that do that not companies looking to take our money.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> No, they shouldn't, but in the US it seems to be the norm for larger companies.
Click to expand...


its unfortunate that companies like Uber would rather ask for forgiveness than ask for permission and that's exactly what Uber have done. its sickening to think that such a company treats authority and the public with such contempt. i hope that TfL makes it as hard as possible for Uber to worm its way back into the London market. with any luck more country's will do the same to this company and make it comply or ban it outright.  

Uber CEO to London: ‘I apologize for the mistakes we’ve made’


----------



## BulletProof

onaquest said:


> its unfortunate that companies like Uber would rather ask for forgiveness than ask for permission and that's exactly what Uber have done. its sickening to think that such a company treats authority and the public with such contempt. i hope that TfL makes it as hard as possible for Uber to worm its way back into the London market. with any luck more country's will do the same to this company and make it comply or ban it outright.
> 
> Uber CEO to London: ‘I apologize for the mistakes we’ve made’



Apologizing is treating authority and the public with contempt?  I apologize, Onaquest, that I have to disagree with you.

From your article, "Why was Uber stripped of its license? ... Working conditions and regulatory concerns."  If Uber were actually doing something to justify having their licence revoked, we'd get a concrete explanation, instead of this always vague bullsh1t.

I agree that Uber isn't really sorry.  But, it's not that they're acting with contempt.  They're groveling to a socialist pig bureaucracy.  It's like if you run a drug store and you sell cotton balls. And, one day those cotton balls trigger some libtard black and she starts screaming about racism... *You just apologize *and say no offense meant, that you'll start sensitivity training for your employees, that you'll donate a bunch of money to black organizations, that you'll hire more blacks, and that you'll replace the cotton balls with some non-racist alternative.  Or, if you run the NFL and one day...


----------



## onaquest

BulletProof said:


> onaquest said:
> 
> 
> 
> its unfortunate that companies like Uber would rather ask for forgiveness than ask for permission and that's exactly what Uber have done. its sickening to think that such a company treats authority and the public with such contempt. i hope that TfL makes it as hard as possible for Uber to worm its way back into the London market. with any luck more country's will do the same to this company and make it comply or ban it outright.
> 
> Uber CEO to London: ‘I apologize for the mistakes we’ve made’
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Apologizing is treating authority and the public with contempt?  I apologize, Onaquest, that I have to disagree with you.
> 
> From your article, "Why was Uber stripped of its license? ... Working conditions and regulatory concerns."  If Uber were actually doing something to justify having their licence revoked, we'd get a concrete explanation, instead of this always vague bullsh1t.
> 
> I agree that Uber isn't really sorry.  But, it's not that they're acting with contempt.  They're groveling to a socialist pig bureaucracy.  It's like if you run a drug store and you sell cotton balls. And, one day those cotton balls trigger some libtard black and she starts screaming about racism... *You just apologize *and say no offense meant, that you'll start sensitivity training for your employees, that you'll donate a bunch of money to black organizations, that you'll hire more blacks, and that you'll replace the cotton balls with some non-racist alternative.  Or, if you run the NFL and one day...
Click to expand...


Uber is apologising to save it skin nothing more. It has played the rules and the people of London for suckers and continues to. Uber is no different than other point to point transport providers in London. If the other drivers and companies that work Taxis and transport services have to adhere to the same rules set down by Transport for London then why shouldn't Uber?

The sad part about Uber and their legion of fanboy's is the complete disregard for the welfare of their passengers. TfL wouldn't/shouldn't have even intervened if Uber were proactive and a responsible transport provider. Instead... we have a paid media circus crying "not fair' and asking for special dispensation so 30 odd women a year can continue to be raped and hundreds if not thousands subjected to god knows what else just so they can continue to undercut other providers and build market share with a no safety unaccountable service, all in the name of technology. sounds like a sleazy company to me. maybe Uber should grovel and ask forgiveness to the hundreds of women that have been attacked by their partners, first. don't you think?


----------

