So it's over; looks a lot like police incompetence again.
A man on his own takes people hostage and parades around very visibly in front of a big window but doesn't get taken out until a swat team goes in with blazing guns. Incredible really.
Printable View
So it's over; looks a lot like police incompetence again.
A man on his own takes people hostage and parades around very visibly in front of a big window but doesn't get taken out until a swat team goes in with blazing guns. Incredible really.
shot dead
one hostage dead too apparently
vid on the news sounded like a lot of gunfire - constant for about 30 secs
The guy was a Shiite who converted to Sunni Islam and supported the kind of groups who want all Shiites dead. Don't see that very often...
...attacking a chocolate café :mad:
As an interesting crossover from another thread: Uber showed that reduction to ultra-capitalism (y'know, setting prices according to supply and demand) may just alienate your customers.
Hey look, what a total unsurprise, Lewk-logic from Khend.
Why is that Lewk-logic? Did you see the shitstorm which descended upon Uber when their prices spiked in Sydney as a result from the hostage situation? And that was no random accident, their first statement via Twitter was to the effect that this was deliberate. Not to mention that their CEO is somewhat of an asshat.
Only after they recognized that this was not very good marketing, they issued an apology and offered any further rides for free.
So it looks like the free market corrected it?
Clearly the better situation would be a shortage of cabs to pick up panicking people (i.e. the consequence of not raising prices).
Uberdrivers trying to get into the CBD would probably not be a really good situation either. And it's summer and the CBD of Sydney isn't the size of Manhatten, you can simply walk out of it. Been there, done that.
So, I guess 'price gouging' isn't criminal in the US, then?
I don;t really see why this should be illegal. But PR wise it can be a bad idea, bad press can cost you more than one day's high earnings.Quote:
Originally Posted by Khendraja'aro
It's not price gouging. Take out the horrific element of the situation, and replace it with 2 cruise ships coming into port at the same time. Uber raises it's prices, would your knickers be in the same wad? Also wasn't there normal taxis still kicking around?Quote:
Originally Posted by Khendraja'aro
Price gouging is defined as raising prices sharply and massively during a civil emergency situation. This behaviour meets every point of the definition of price gouging.
Maybe you guys should look up some definitions if you don't know what you're talking about. Veldan, your cruise ship example absolutely fails to meet the point. Please educate yourself.
Seriously, guys. You make fun of Ayn Rand and yet spout forth drivel here that would've made her proud.
I doubt very much Uber rides are the only way to get out of Sydney's city center.
On topic; I think the two dead hostages may very well be blamed on the inapt way the police dealt with this situation.
One car service company raising its prices due to sharp demand does not really make it price gouging in my book when there are a slew of other options to leave the area.
You have a hard on against Uber anyway, and I at least try to not let my emotions guide my posts anymore.
Khen - I honestly don't have a big opinion on whether Uber was doing something wrong here, but I disagree that it was criminal by most legal definitions of 'price gouging'. The concern in a civil emergency is that people who literally have no other choice are going to be fleeced to get basic services. E.g. someone charging absurd prices for bottled water if the taps aren't on or safe (after, say, a chemical spill). Then, it's an issue of public safety and coercion.Quote:
Originally Posted by Khendraja'aro
However, I do not think that this is remotely similar. It may - perhaps - qualify as a 'civil emergency', in that people couldn't enter or travel in a few blocks of downtown Sydney. Yet the city was still functioning, with all of its basic services - including transportation. This was not Katrina-hit NO. The challenge, however, is that there was limited supply of transportation to rapidly move a big bolus of people home. It's like rush hour suddenly appearing without any warning. There are two options - either people wait in line and pay the same amount whether they go home earlier or later, or you prioritize people based on how much they pay. Everyone gets the product in the end, one way or another, but waiting is stratified by price rather than serendipity.
In fact, one could argue that this already happens. Owning a car is more expensive than taking an occasional cab, which is more expensive than public transit, which is more expensive than walking/biking. Yet the more expensive options are generally faster. Here, you're just extending that logic to surge pricing of a single good rather than a family thereof.
It may be in poor taste, but I don't think it fits a legal definition of price gouging.
I'm assuming the price surging is tripped via some sort of script. Its not the first time an emergency has caused this effect with Uber. I don't like it, but as long as Uber keeps to the behavior of claiming the surge was to get more drivers on the road, and then refunding those charges because of the emergency, I can't hate them for it either.
Well, that's a weak excuse. "Oh, the computer made us do it!"
Not to mention that their Tweet showed that they were bloody well aware of the situation and knew the consequences for their fares.
I don't like companies run by asshats. Particularly when they try to drive prices down to a point where drivers actually get a net loss if they're driving for them (most people forget that merely owning a car already incurs costs).
Yeah, it's awful when supply and demand produces a price instead of having our politicians, the true beacons of morality and wisdom, do that job instead.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Khendraja'aro
Let's say, this situation would have happened in Israel. What are the chances the man would have wound up with a hole in his head after the authorities establishing that he was alone while still parading in front of a big window? Without a 15 hour standoff I mean?
Israel has had their share of botched hostage rescues. I don't know enough about the Sydney situation to speak with any intelligence about whether they bungled things or not, but these are never easy calls.
Wasn't there a threat of explosive devices? That could be a reason not to shoot him (dead man's switch, etc.).
One man does not wield a gun and a dead man switch for 14 hours. I doubt he could have pulled that off for even a couple of minutes. It was known from the calls that he was alone. He exposed himself in front of the shop window several times.Quote:
Originally Posted by Flixy
I think they were working from the premise the situation could be defused as if he wasn't on a suicide mission.
How the hell did this thread turn into a debate about price gouging and Uber? :(
What happened in Sydney was sad and tragic, but I'm not sure it can be blamed on police incompetence at the scene. Seems to me they did things by-the-book for hostage situations, and only went to plan B after shots were fired in the cafe.
I think any failures began at the legislative or judicial level. This man was convicted for accessory to murder of his ex-wife (who was stabbed and set on fire). He was apparently "well known" by authorities, with several violent/sexual assault convictions and a social media footprint full of red flags.
With that history, why wasn't he in jail (or a locked down psych facility) pending sentencing? :confused: