> Uber driver Juan Prado made six figures in 2021, often shuttling passengers in town for job interviews and doing frequent drop-offs near downtown tech offices. Now, he said, demand is much lower. “There are moments where you can be online, and in certain areas, it shows nothing.”
"Seattle has the nation’s most expensive Uber rides" (Seattle Times). Rides to the airport have increased 50% for me in the past year, to about $75, and it's at best twice as fast as the $3 train. I doubt it's just fewer tech jobs suppressing Uber activity since 2021.
Seattle levied taxes and fees on Uber and deliveries that are so high that it is comical. You literally will pay more in taxes and fees to the city than you’d ordinarily pay for the goods and services you are actually consuming. Like, up to 100% effective tax rates on consumption. Unsurprisingly, people noped out and now there is a new crisis because people that provided those services are underemployed or unemployed.
The politicians begrudgingly acknowledge the massive drop in business but simultaneously assert they can’t change anything because “it was the right thing to do”. Meanwhile, the people that worked in those businesses aren’t getting paid. Seattle has the highest minimum wage in the country, almost $21/hr before tips, but that is a cold comfort if there isn’t enough business to give you hours.
You and all the commenters dont see the bigger problem: too much consumption tax could be the resut of tax cuts somewhere else, on someone with a bigger lobby than ordinary consumers.
If you follow that clue (balanced taxation between capital and labor/consumption, to me, the f'ing elephant in the room), youd might not end your problem descriptions with "look how high the minimum wage is".
> politicians begrudgingly acknowledge the massive drop in business but simultaneously assert they can’t change anything because “it was the right thing to do”
> Seattle levied taxes and fees on Uber and deliveries that are so high that it is comical. You literally will pay more in taxes and fees to the city than you’d ordinarily pay for the goods and services you are actually consuming. Like, up to 100% effective tax rates on consumption. Unsurprisingly, people noped out and now there is a new crisis because people that provided those services are underemployed or unemployed.
Is there? Because my understanding is Uber-delivered goods typically weren't profitable for the providers in any case (see: ghost kitchens, with lower costs than traditional restaurants, going bankrupt because of Uber's high fees). Killing the delusion dead is probably the best outcome.
Not just rideshare, but food delivery has been practically outlawed with all the taxes and fees. We have…
Sales tax: 10.25% on prepared delivery food.
Commission cap: Apps can only charge restaurants up to 15% per order, which leads to apps passing on fees to consumers
PayUp ordinance from 2024: delivery workers must be paid at least $0.44 per engaged minute + $0.74 per engaged mile, or a minimum of $5 per offer, whichever is greater. For 2025, those rates increase to $0.45/minute, $0.77/mile, or $5.20 per offer.
I tried to order 1 pad Thai and 1 curry the other night and it was going to be over $70. Insanity.
Delivery seems expensive now because it was only ever made cheap by underpaying workers, giving them no benefits, making them cover their own car costs, and forcing them to rely on tips to survive. The truth is, having someone drive your pad thai and curry across town costs real money, and I’d rather pick it up myself than keep pretending cheap delivery was ever anything but exploitation.
The problem isn’t that delivery itself is exploitation, just the delivery apps. The issue is that the claimed scaling factor that makes the apps work doesn’t exist. Turns out drivers get more money and delivery costs less if you pizza is delivered by a pizzeria employee than a delivery driving app contractor.
> Tipping should never be expected and be part of the base salary
I agree. Here, the choice is between tipping and rendering that person unemployed (or underemployed) because of projected morality. I'm arguing that it's better for the people one purports to help to hand over a tip and not support reducing their work, or worse, to advocate that others not use their services.
No! It is the company’s job to price their service to cover costs. I get to decide if I pay. Tipping does not make exploitation any less real. Of course I tip when necessary. That's besides the point.
> It is the company’s job to price their service to cover costs
They did. They made money. The delivery staff made money--OP is quoting the real, lived experience of actual gig workers. The government came in and decided that was unsavory, and so now those staff are making less (not counting the ones now unemployed).
There is always someone willing to work for a dollar. That doesn't mean we should abolish the minimum wage to exploit desperation.
Gig workers are just bullshit countries invented to hide unemployment. They don't ad anything to the economy. Nobody is buying a house or starting a family as a Uber delivery driver.
> doesn't mean we should abolish the minimum wage to exploit desperation
I agree. If all the city had done was raise the minimum wage (and make it applicable to these workers), that would have been fine. They didn't. They added a targeted tax.
> Nobody is buying a house or starting a family as a Uber delivery driver
Not in Seattle, but objectively untrue across the country. But also, I don't think it's fair to say we should render unemployed everyone who has a job that they can't start a family or buy a house on.
>Commission cap: Apps can only charge restaurants up to 15% per order, which leads to apps passing on fees to consumers
You mean you have to pay for the delivery service you're asking for? Shocking!
IMO it should be 0% of the cost should be borne by the restaurant. You still have a sizeable amount of your convenience being distributed to all patrons of the restaurant with 15%. That's 15% too much. Pay for what you ordered. I like to go in person, I don't want to support single-use delivery waste, Currently I'm forced to foot your bill if I want to go to any restaurant.
> I'm forced to foot your bill if I want to go to any restaurant
Deliveries are marginal business for a restaurant. Like, yes, as a consumer I have a better experience if a restaurant has lower volumes. But that's not as much fun if you're the restaurant!
In most major metros, an entree is easily $25. So paying $50 for your food, $15 for somebody to deliver it to you, and $5 in taxes is really not all that crazy
Why do you have to pay taxes? You already paid them before salary hit your bank account (~30% in most countries) and anybody who receives your money will pay it as well.
Different taxes go to different places, and taxes do not exist only to take money from people. Amongst other reasons, they exist to discourage certain behaviors, pay for externalities, or because the market does not price in the costs of certain things.
Leaving Seattle 10 years ago was the best decision of my life. Awful weather, high prices, physical isolation, traffic. It had a good job market, though... Without it, I don't know what's left.
The irony of the fabled Seattle complaints of the “freeze” is it’s not unique to the region whatsoever and due to so many transplants in the past 15-ish years along with so many locals forcibly relocating out of the city people are more likely than ever to be interacting with those that moved as adults / other transplants.
For me as someone that grew up in the region the people, nature, and weather are sufficient enough for me. Having lived in several other large metro areas in the US I’ve pretty much felt like an alien species even though it’s not like I don’t feel welcome. In the PNW being weird and unconventional is kind of celebrated regardless of socioeconomic castes historically, but that’s certainly eroded as the problems of hyper growth have strained everyone.
I feel like this is more of just "seattleites respect people's autonomy." I think a lot of places can be really invasive to outsiders of "what are you doing here?" and I htink Seattle is just more "mind your own business" as a culture.
I mean, I worked in both northern Europe and Seattle. For as bad as Americans think Seattle is, most of Europe is much worse. You would have to go pretty far south in Europe to have Seattle weather. Seattle is too warm to even have snow most years.
Americans have no idea that pretty much their entire country is south of Paris.
Anywhere that isn't cold, gray and rainy 8 months of the year. And please don't say "Seattle isn't that rainy in total precipitation volume" - I lived there for close to a decade and know its weather very well. I had never had seasonal depression spells in my life before (or after) living in Seattle.
When interest rates again are low, money is cheap, people will look for ways to make money on money, there will be another boom and massive demand for people.
It's not becuase of interest rates (or section 174 or H1Bs or whatever boogeyman you want)
Microsoft, Amazon, and other firms have been steadily moving out of Seattle for the past several years - first doing domestic offshoring in Tier 2 metros like RTP, DMV, and Denver and after that to dramatically expanding their already significant presence in the CEE and India.
A lot of people on work visas who were impacted during the initial COVID visa issues were PMs, EMs, and other mid-level managers who when they shifted back to their home country were given P/L and product responsibilities, and as such the center of gravity has left Seattle.
On top of that, local Seattle area politicians strangled the golden goose by becoming populist tech haters - great for winning an election, but did nothing for the Seattle or Washington economy.
I can't get archive.is to work with this, but if you're subscribed to Apple News+ (e.g. through the Apple One bundle), you can read it here: https://apple.news/AWYHVpxN6QQWlM1h__Hp9nA
1. The tech companies knew an H1B price change was coming
2. They offshored and front-loaded their H1B hiring
3. AI means much smaller teams, they will just hire 01
The damage has been done, American workers are just bag holders.
Most companies began opening offices abroad with P/L and roadmap ownership responsibilities during the initial Covid layoffs, because the first employees cut were those on work visas. Despite the stereotypes on this forum, this included a lot of PMs, EMs, and Principal Engineers.
When companies began rehiring during the COVID recovery, they began rehiring these former employees, but giving them a significant salary premium while allowing them to open and manage entire offices abroad. On top of that, CEE, Israel, and India all give massive subsidizes and roll the red carpet for companies to open high headcount offices which made it easier to do this move.
Now in 2025, you can see the 75th percentile of TCs in India and Romania in the $50k-60k mark and the 90th percentile breaking the $75k-85k mark, so it's not only cheap back office work.
The median household income in the Greater Seattle Area is $121k [0] and the median house sale price is $775k [1].
This means the median income to house ratio is roughly 1:5.5
This is fairly standard across the US, and was true even 20 years ago.
For example, in 2000 the median household income ($46k [2]) and house price (~$240k [3]) ratio was roughly 1:5.5. This ratio held true in 2024 as well with a median household income of $83k [2] and a median house price of ~430k [3].
As such, the cost of buying a house as a ratio of household income hasn't changed. The only thing that has changed is the perception.
I can't find too much direct historical data on this, but this article says the price to income ratio for Seattle in 1998 was 2.5, and their chart says the 50th percentile was around 3.0 in that year. https://www.jchs.harvard.edu/blog/price-to-income-ratios-are...
Edit: This page has a historical slider that you can go back and see the price to income ratio of various metro areas over time. If you go back to the late 90s you will see overwhelming dark blue (dark blue is <3.0). https://www.jchs.harvard.edu/son-2025-price-to-income-map
Also note that the study you mentioned is comparing prices in 2018 with two recession recovery years (2011 and [edit: typo] 1988 - the year of the S&L crisis), which is an unfair comparison against 2018.
The text "1989" isn't in the article I linked. You may have meant "1988". But I'm not trying to assert that the headline of the article or the comparisons it makes are worthwhile. I'm just referencing some data points contained therein.
If we use FRED and HUD data for 2005 we find the median household income in Washington (cannot find a Seattle MSA specific dataset) and and median house sale price in the Seattle MSA to be $54k [0] and $309k [1] respectively which roughly becomes 1:5.5 again.
Well I can't dispute Fred and Hud. I wonder if the discrepancy has to do with the harvard data only considering metro areas, and metro areas having significantly higher incomes but possibly not significantly higher median house price.
My hunch is they are using per capita income instead of median household income.
If two partners are buying a house together (a fairly common occurrence) per capita ratios would treat both partners as an individual, but a household would help fix for that discrepancy.
Median household incomes take into account households of all sizes (1 person households to n-person households), and if you compare against median price, you can help reduce the risks of outliers tainting any comparison.
I think this happens to any city whose existing population and culture gets rapidly overwhelmed in a small amount of time, such that the existing group sees its way of life being erased. It can happen with situations like sudden mass migration (like in some European cities where they were used as relocation centers for asylum immigrants). But in Seattle’s case, I am betting it’s the tech industry as a whole not just Amazon. The city probably saw a large influx of people from California and also outside the US, replacing the earlier vibes, all within 20 years.
If you live in a tech growth region get your truck driver, construction, bar tender friends or neighbors to be truly honest with you about how they view "tech guys" and the impacts of massive tech growth on their cities and the impacts on their personal quality of life and you'll learn a lot about how people feel, especially if they're renters.
Hmm, and who do you think contributed to the salaries, tips and businesses of the above mentioned groups. I'm quite sure a large part came from tech salaries. Everything is related. You can't jump off the planet.
>> If you live in a tech growth region get your truck driver, construction, bar tender friends or neighbors to be truly honest with you about how they view "tech guys" and the impacts of massive tech growth on their cities and the impacts on their personal quality of life and you'll learn a lot about how people feel, especially if they're renters.
> Hmm, and who do you think contributed to the salaries, tips and businesses of the above mentioned groups. I'm quite sure a large part came from tech salaries.
It also turns out people care about more than just money.
I got pushed out of Santa Cruz, along with most of the people I grew up with and most friends. Those that remained ended up with kind of a rump version of normal life because expenses are so high, friends and family are all gone and not because they wanted to leave. Sometimes resentment is felt. Sadness for the world you knew being lost.
I'm sure they would argue that the primary impact is higher prices (of housing especially), not higher salaries and tips. If you have a few new high income people come into a neighborhood, that feels like some extra dollars coming into the neighborhood; but if a large enough portion starts to become high income transplants, suddenly the locale starts catering to high income as the median consumer target, and previously-middle income workers are now relatively low income.
"Seattle has the nation’s most expensive Uber rides" (Seattle Times). Rides to the airport have increased 50% for me in the past year, to about $75, and it's at best twice as fast as the $3 train. I doubt it's just fewer tech jobs suppressing Uber activity since 2021.