Not really the same. Charging for this would discourage people from using it. They have to make a choice on feeling safe vs. spending money.
This gives everyone the option and subsidizes it to the entire community.
This is exactly why socializing things like this is beneficial.
Every service has a cost. That cost is the value of the labor being provided. But we decide as a society that providing services like this benefits everyone living in society. Regardless of if they use it directly or not.
When people say “free” in this context that’s what they mean. They mean the decision based on personal finance is removed.
We don’t want people choosing personal finance over safety or health. Removing that dependency benefits everyone.
Glad you got that! Its a major point in talking about social programs. If you can see this in college programs you can see the benefit when applied to social programs as well. Not sure if I can convince you of that too. But it’s always nice to get a response of “that makes sense” in this context.
It’s also run by people vetted by the school who are also employees so they generally have other responsibilities and then the service doesn’t generate a profit. Which is a long way of saying it’s not even remotely close to being the same
I found out in my senior year, that my campus had been plagued by a serial rapist for several years, going back to before i was a freshman, and the school had covered it up. I only found out about it when i learned that my roommate’s girlfriend had a sorority sister on a full-ride scholarship to keep her quiet about being raped in her freshman year.
Suddenly, the pressure to use their chaperone service became clear.
John Mulaney has a joke about how his parents knew Bill Clinton that way, from all going to undergrad together at Georgetown. Apparently all the women loved being escorted by Bill Clinton, and the men were all jealous.
Tbh, it makes sense. You don’t end up being president by being a no-rizz fool. You may be considering bringing up Trump as a counter-argument, but just look at all the people that are letting him pound them in the ass right now.
My school had a number you could call and they’d dispatch a golf cart with 2 student workers to take you anywhere on campus for free, 24/7 (minus holidays and breaks when University offices were cosed).
The business model is to make it cheap initially by subsidizing it with investor capital. So, the gig worker may be paid more than the user is being charged. Then, eventually raise the price once the user base is large enough and dependent enough on it (or the prior alternative is sufficiently put out of business).
If they actually matched up with the routes other people might take, I would do it. I’m always walking around downtown anyways, but I’m a relatively large poor-looking man so I never get hassled.
Speaking as a person who does not fit the demographic for this service, the big problem I see with it is how you trust that the walking buddy is actually going to be safer than nothing. Uber drivers are somewhat regularly in the news for assaulting women and I know several women that don’t like riding them alone
Honestly this is a great joke but also could legitimately be a good service for someone who didn’t feel safe walking alone, or needs help navigating
A lot of university campuses have this. It’s a good idea.
They probably don’t charge money for that service though, and that’s a better idea.
They do, it’s part of the tuition
Not really the same. Charging for this would discourage people from using it. They have to make a choice on feeling safe vs. spending money.
This gives everyone the option and subsidizes it to the entire community.
This is exactly why socializing things like this is beneficial.
Every service has a cost. That cost is the value of the labor being provided. But we decide as a society that providing services like this benefits everyone living in society. Regardless of if they use it directly or not.
When people say “free” in this context that’s what they mean. They mean the decision based on personal finance is removed.
We don’t want people choosing personal finance over safety or health. Removing that dependency benefits everyone.
Good point. A sort of community service I guess
Glad you got that! Its a major point in talking about social programs. If you can see this in college programs you can see the benefit when applied to social programs as well. Not sure if I can convince you of that too. But it’s always nice to get a response of “that makes sense” in this context.
Maybe subsidized by it, but a lot of services from my local state institution are accessible by all.
It’s also run by people vetted by the school who are also employees so they generally have other responsibilities and then the service doesn’t generate a profit. Which is a long way of saying it’s not even remotely close to being the same
I found out in my senior year, that my campus had been plagued by a serial rapist for several years, going back to before i was a freshman, and the school had covered it up. I only found out about it when i learned that my roommate’s girlfriend had a sorority sister on a full-ride scholarship to keep her quiet about being raped in her freshman year.
Suddenly, the pressure to use their chaperone service became clear.
John Mulaney has a joke about how his parents knew Bill Clinton that way, from all going to undergrad together at Georgetown. Apparently all the women loved being escorted by Bill Clinton, and the men were all jealous.
Tbh, it makes sense. You don’t end up being president by being a no-rizz fool. You may be considering bringing up Trump as a counter-argument, but just look at all the people that are letting him pound them in the ass right now.
Well yeah, he was the president.
My school had a number you could call and they’d dispatch a golf cart with 2 student workers to take you anywhere on campus for free, 24/7 (minus holidays and breaks when University offices were cosed).
how can it be this cheap though? sure it doesn’t require gas but it takes longer so the guy would need more pay for the service right?
The business model is to make it cheap initially by subsidizing it with investor capital. So, the gig worker may be paid more than the user is being charged. Then, eventually raise the price once the user base is large enough and dependent enough on it (or the prior alternative is sufficiently put out of business).
If they actually matched up with the routes other people might take, I would do it. I’m always walking around downtown anyways, but I’m a relatively large poor-looking man so I never get hassled.
Speaking as a person who does not fit the demographic for this service, the big problem I see with it is how you trust that the walking buddy is actually going to be safer than nothing. Uber drivers are somewhat regularly in the news for assaulting women and I know several women that don’t like riding them alone