Quote:
Originally Posted by transplant99
I am saying that the city issued a statement that one of the reasons they oppose UBER is because of no safety inspections on that vehicle. The problem with that stance is that...that same vehicle does not require any safety inspections as long as it isn't used to make the owner of the car a few bucks on the weekend driving that car. So their stance that it is a "public safety concern" is a load of horse puckey because that car, whether used as an uber or not, is still the same car whether it has one, two or 4 people riding in it and whether or not that driver is getting paid.
I never said you did defend the cartel. Where are you getting that from?
Aaaaaand there it is. You go complete jackass and get personal like always.
Well done.
|
Well when you said,
Quote:
|
Its a joke allright and apparently you have fallen for it.
|
I found personally insulting and what else could you be referring to "it" other than what you call the cartel? So don't throw stones when you live in a glass house.