Thank you! I learned some stuff today.

The “dick argument” is the one that says a server deserves less money for serving a plate with a cheap item than they do for serving a plate with an expensive item; you’re saying their pay should depend on what the customer decides to eat - which is fucking stupid.

That’s a stupid argument and you know it.

As a theoretical setup, I had to do some drawings for my workplace to try and fit as many patrons into seating as possible (so many 3' circles that couldn’t overlap...so many). We went from having 3500 seats to safely fitting about 500. Then we realized that we’d need to arrange for them to arrive in a specific order…

My wife and I went to a favorite neighborhood bar when they opened up for outdoor dining. The servers were very deliberate in how they presented drinks, served food, bussed tables. It did inspire confidence in their resolve to keep things safe.

I grill salmon all the time, right on the grates, and I never lose salmon. It always comes off in tact, you just can’t flip or move it too soon. 

Sounds like your plan just gets the delivery guy to subsidize the consumer and restaurant by working on the cheap. Its only a “win-win” because your teenage delivery crew has lower standards. This could never be applied in large scale.

“By explicitly informing customers that these fees exist because of new legislation, Uber is deliberately trying to make people unhappy with the executive order, potentially influencing the way its customers vote.”

“Uber Eats promotes Black-owned businesses, but who benefits?”

Well said.

Delivery companies are doing shitty things, but most of the restaurant’s they’re serving don’t have their own delivery infrastructure.

If I’m ordering a Pizza, I’ll go to Domino’s website and do it directly from them. But that Taiwanese place with the great popcorn chicken and bubble tea? They only offer delivery apps…

Here are some basic journalistic tools.

Life-long registered Democrat, African-American native New Yorker, Harlem resident: this kind of article is just further proof of good intentions paving everyone else’s road to hell.

“Anything I can do anyone else can do, and if they can’t they are just lazy” - you (paraphrase)

I’ve struggled with all the anti-delivery-app articles of late because it all seems to be focused on details that are either invisible to the consume or irrelevant to them.

Sounds like the restaurants just need to raise prices or stop signing on to the delivery service.  

If it is so destructive, why do the restaurants continue to use them? They clearly think they make more money using them than not or they’d cancel the service. There’s no force being used here.

You answered your own question: They could hire their own delivery drivers.

As a vet, I can tell you this is pretty much exactly how we feel over all the fawning and ‘thank you for your service’ crap.

You understand that the tax revenue from taxing “vice” items can then be used to fund healthcare, correct? So, if you want to hurt yourself, great! You’ll just have to pay a little extra for the burden you put on society as a whole, when we’ll have to pay for your multiple surgeries and treatments.