Regarding Uber, his argument wasn't so much "poor cabbies" on its own, but seemed to be more like "look at where the money is going, it's going out of the economy and into investors, growth".
So, poor cabbies is one thing, but it would be more about the redistribution of wealth from a community of people to a company. Uber is not a ride sharing service, it's a business model.
The article makes clear his view: If we think short sighted that it's only good for getting rides - we are missing the point. And he says that much about digital natives - they miss the point.
So, poor cabbies is one thing, but it would be more about the redistribution of wealth from a community of people to a company. Uber is not a ride sharing service, it's a business model.
The article makes clear his view: If we think short sighted that it's only good for getting rides - we are missing the point. And he says that much about digital natives - they miss the point.