Brand Management at Uber

Brand Management at Uber Uber Case Analysis BACKGROUND Uber is a taxi service that connects users with independent car drivers by just a push of a button on an app (Exhibit 1) (Uber, 2017).Uber is known for its accessible anytime and low cost to luxury services (Uber, 2017). Ubers’ value to its drivers is that it promotes additional source of income, flexible working hours, and those who can earn money for doing their hobby. It focuses on customers who do not own a car, like to travel in style, and prefer a cost-efficient cab. Uber’s primary competitors in the United States are Lyft, traditional taxi drivers, public transportation and car owners. It earns revenue by taking 20% commission on each ride, while the rest goes to the driver. Uber has shown continuous growth, with net revenue of approximately $5.97 billion in 2016. However, they have also been incurring huge losses over the past couple of years, and had losses of $3 billion at the end of 2016 (Exhibit 2). Lyft, Ubers’ main competitor, has had a dramatic inc rease in growth in the past years, while Ubers’ growth has stagnated (Exhibit 3). Investors have been pressuring the CEO to go towards an IPO because it will be an easier way to raise cash trading in the financial market. The CEO has been delaying an IPO launch because Uber is trying to smooth out all bumps as a private company before going public. Currently, Uber raises its capital through venture capital firms and it is valued at $69 billion (Abboud, 2017).   Ã‚  Ã‚   One of Uber’s key marketing strategy for acquiring new customers is through word of mouth, which allows the company to spend virtually no money on advertisement. 95% of Uber drivers have heard about the company from another Uber riders and for every 7 Uber rides, word of mouth generates one new customer. The word of mouth strategy and the referral program allowed Uber to rise in popularity in many cities around North America and internationally. At the end of 2016, Uber was successful in expanding to approximately   81 countries and 581 cities worldwide. However, in the span of just two months, three major incidents are now resulting in the company to be viewed in a negative light. These events have been damaging people’s perception of Uber and its brand image through social media and word of mouth, the same platforms that helped Uber gain popularity in the first place. JFK Airport President Trump signed an executive order of banning refugees from seven predominantly Muslim nations, which created outrage and chaos in airports. The New York Taxi Workers Alliance showed their support for detained refugees by avoiding John F. Kennedy International Airport between 6p.m. to 7 p.m. on 28th January. Instead of standing with the Taxi drivers, Uber decided to eliminate their surge prices around the JFK region caused considerable outrage on Twitter and caused an increase of search of this topic on Google (Exhibit 4). Uber’s surge pricing is a company practice of temporary raising prices of rides because of the high demand and insufficient supply of drivers. Customers and competitors perceived this decision either as profiting off the situation and/or supporting the President’s travel ban because lowered price allowed Uber to capture higher sales. Uber quickly responded by stating that they were not in support of the Presidents executive order nor were they trying to profit from the situation. Uber’s spokesperson has said that the decision to turn-off their surge prices was due to increased demand during the protest. The Uber CEO also spoke out against the executive order through Facebook to mitigate the storm of outraged consumers. However, this did not work, which eventually resulted to Uber CEO’s resignation from his position on the Presidents’ Economic Advisory Council. Social media activists created #DeleteUber that went viral, which was tweeted 222,000 times and caused 200,000 Uber riders to delete their accounts by having screenshots of themselves deleting the app and posting it through twitter (Exhibit 5). On the other hand, Lyft responded by donating $1 million to the American Civil Liberties Union, which is a civil rights group that is fighting the executive order in the US courts. This negative news reporting caused Lyft to increase its market share from 16.5% to 20.9% in the ride-hailing industry and the spending on Lyft by consumers spiked by 30% (Exhibit 6).The #DeleteUber caused 7% increase of users for Lyft, where more than half were previous Uber users before JFK incident(Exhibit 7). Furthermore, 81% of the users that joined Lyft deleted Uber permanently (Hinchlife, 2017). Following Lyfts announcement of donating $1 million to the American Civil Liberalities, it increased riders by 30%, whereas Uber had a 10% decrease in users at around the same time frame (Bhattarai, 2017). Additionally, this public relations nightmare encouraged and gave growth to new competitors in the New York City region, such as Juno. Juno has had a dramatic spike in growth at the end of January 2017, which could potentially make it a future competitor (Exhibit 8).   In addition, Uber’s rank in all app downloads   went down that day, which is valued at a $40 million loss. Lyft has surpassed Uber as the top downloaded app during the time of travel ban news report (Exhibit 9) (Williams, 2017).    Sexual Harassment Incident Following the decision for Uber to turn-off surge prices, a former engineer, Susan Fowler spoke out about her experience of sexual harassment and neglect by the HR department at Uber through her blog (Exhibit 10, 11). Susans blog was shared on Twitter 22,000 times, which encouraged more Uber users to delete the app. Marian Baldauf, former Uber user, said â€Å"When I read the woman’s blog it was just so deeply offensive and so wrong in so many ways that I just couldn’t do it anymore, so I switched to Lyft. I’ve taken two rides since and they’ve been wonderful†. CEO quickly responded that the company has hired US Attorney General Eric Holder to investigate the claims of sexism, sexual harassment, and Ubers’ culture. CEO also made a statement through its website that â€Å"Ubers number one priority is creating a just workplace†. A report has shown that women accounted for 15.1% of Uber engineers, product management, and scientist teams, which is lower than Google, Twitter, and Facebook. The CEO asked for Amir Singhal, Senior Vice President of Engineering, to resign due to not disclosing his sexual harassment allegations at Google.The VP of Product and Growth Ed Baker also resigned due to allegations of sexual harassment at Uber. The timing of these new revelations gave consumers more added incentive to delete the app. According to the blog post by Susan, when she started working with Uber, women accounted for 25% of the workforce. When she resigned the number went down to as low as 6% (Thomas, 2017).   Fowlers blog boosted Lyft’s market share to increase to 21.3% and it was consistent in all the four top markets in the US (Exhibit 12) (Jones, 2017). The #DeleteUber campaign during this time again exploded and caused more Uber users to delete their app. In the meantime, Lyft launched their services to 50 more cities during this time (Moscaritolo, 2017). Video: CEO v.s. Uber Driver The CEO was caught on camera shouting and being insensitive to an Uber driver Fawzi Kamal. Kamal, who has been with the company since 2011, confronted the CEO at the end of the ride in San Francisco for lowering prices for Uber’s luxury high end chauffeur service (Exhibit 11, 13).   The CEO was caught on camera saying â€Å"Some people don’t like to take responsibility for their own s†.   The CEO was forced to issue an apology to staff members and said that â€Å"it’s clear this video reflects me and the criticism we’ve received is a stark reminder that I must fundamentally change as a leader and grow up†. The CEO explained and responded by claiming to attend a leadership seminar and its reported that he will hire an executive to work alongside himself. This news report adds to the bad relationship Uber has with its own drivers leading to low driver loyalty towards Uber (Exhibit 14). Many drivers continue to be with Uber for the simple fact that Uber subsidizes their pay in many areas. However, Ubers goal is to lower its prices to beat the competitors, which leads to   a reduction in drivers’ salary. An Uber driver from California has said â€Å"I think a lot of drivers feel that Uber always looked out for themselves first and foremost and relegated drivers to a second tier†. 400,000 drivers have currently left Uber to go to its competitors. Competitors have marketed to drivers about their better compensation and tip app. However, drivers have explained that they do get more business with Uber due to its reach. Uber drivers’ compensation is around $15.97 per hour compared to the $13 but it does not account for gasoline, insurance, and the cost of the vehicle (Kuo, 2016) (Exhibit 15). Market research was conducted and it showed that most drivers will pick Lyft over Uber due to its tip app. The Rideshare Guy blog conducted survey that showed that 75.8% of Lyft drivers have said that they were satisfied with their experience with Lyft, while 49.4% Uber drivers are satisfied. Lyft drivers earn $1.82 more per hour than Uber drivers.The issue that caused this was due to the lowering of prices of Uber products, while the average trip lengths are 10.2 minutes per trip for Uber drivers (Exhibit 16 ). ANALYSIS Uber is a profit oriented business that, unfortunately, has made revenue generation its main goal rather than satisfaction of its customers. Uber has not realized that having a traditional approach to revenue gaining inevitably hurts a business nowadays rather than helps it. Uber is not taking into consideration other equally important factors, such as corporate social responsibility, that makes a business successful in a world that has become so small, that with just a click of a button, any negative review of a business revolves globally, defaming a business if it has profited unethically and unfairly. As of now, Uber has been highly criticized for three incidents in a period of just two months. Taking advantage of taxicab and taxi drivers that were striking for the â€Å"Muslim Travel Ban† is one of the most unethical financial decision that Uber took, which led to a global uproar. 200,000 Uber apps were deleted within five days when #deleteUber was created on social media. Analyzing this, the very first thing it is doing wrong, is over emphasising on revenue generation. Before the decision of not surging up the prices, Uber did not realize the backfire it would face from the millennials, its main target audience, who, around 61%, want to contribute for the betterment of the world. Hence, when Uber took advantage of the taxi drivers, who are predominantly from Muslim countries, its target audience was furious, as Uber’s view and its actions did not align with the perspective of the millennials. As shown in Exhibit 2, 2016 revenue increased by 14.58% from first quarter to second quarter, and there was a massive rise of 53.55% in the third quarter. By taking the average, the last quarter increase would be about (14.58 + 53.55)/2 = 34%, which is around $2278 million. Adding all the revenue, the sum net revenue for the year of 2016 would be approximately $6038 million. The number of active users in 2016 was 15.8 million as shown in (Exhibit 17),and hence the average revenue generation from one active user per year is 6038m/15.8m = $382.15. This can lead to the conclusion that because of the deletion of Uber App after this incident, there was a loss of 200000*382.15 = -$76.43 million. Even though they might have earned quite a lot of revenue by not surging up the prices for that one hour, they have, at the end, suffered a huge loss from their action.Because 81% of the 10% Uber users deleted the app permanently, this has caused high customer attrition rate who will ask their friends and family to delete the app as well. This will further harm the brand image and improve the chances of Uber’s competitors, like Lyft, to capture the customers. Moreover, its pricing strategy was extremely wrong during such a delicate situation. Uber’s decision of not surging up the prices was perceived as purely a decision of financial gain by most people. Others also thought of Uber supporting the Travel Ban mainly because of this pricing strategy. This will further increase the number of people perceiving Uber as only revenue generators, further defaming the company. Because of the vast reach of social media, good and bad information is always streaming into social networking sites.In case of Uber, this negative information has affected consumers’ perceptions and has deteriorated brand reputation built during Uber’s years of operation, until and unless Uber changes its perception and aligns its values with the values of its target customers. There are, however, other reasons that led Uber to take this poor decision in the first place, and that is lack of corporate social responsibility. Uber has been trying to expand to as many countries as possible. Though extremely hard, it has been very successful in expanding its business, thereby operating in 81 countries worldwide. However, seeing that it started as a business in 2009, it just took Uber less than ten years to expand this much, which can lead to the conclusion that Uber might have over expanded. Instead of creating brand equity and finding creative ways to satisfy its customers, employees and the community as a whole, Uber has focused mainly on expansion rather than making strategic decisions for itself. Also, because there are excessive legal, advertisement and operational fees every time a company operates in a new country, most of Uber’s revenue goes towards these costs, and hence it does not have any money for taking social initiatives that might resonate with its target audience. Its lack of money for corporate social responsibility after these expansion costs is a huge reason for taking such poor decisions that counteracts the brand image it intends to make for itself. Its lack of taking any social initiatives firstly contradicts millennials’ views of helping the world be a better place, and it also makes it harder for people to believe that what they did was unintentional and there was no greed for financial gain. Its image of being constantly perceived as a revenue generator does not help Uber in this crisis since this goes against Uber’s value proposition. Susan J. Fowler’s blog about sexism, gender disparity, and sexual harassment was another crisis that Uber had to face. The worst part, however, was that Uber had made no attempts to help her; instead they were threatening to fire her for her complaints to HR. After this incident, there was a third increase in searches on Google Trends (Exhibit 11), which resulted in more #deleteUber tweets. With 25% women working in Uber when she joined, only 6% were left after one year when she decided to quit. This doesn’t just show the unprofessional environment for its employees, but also the unfair treatment of women in 2017, a time when companies are trying strenuously to eradicate the discriminatory practices. The uproar against the blog was hard for Uber, though not at all surprising. Even though Uber has expanded enormously, it has not taken proper measures to keep a professional environment for its employees. In today’s competitive environment, a company this big should provide a proper HR facility to its employees; where their concerns can be heard and willing to take proper action be taken if any problem arises. Instead, it seems like no proper guidelines about how to behave in a workplace are given to its employees. Even if employees are told about them, no strict action is taken against those who break the rules. Hence, it motivates people like the manager to continue their unethical and illegal behaviour as the HR is doing nothing to show its employees the consequences of their actions. For a workplace of only 6% women, no new woman would want to even apply to such an organization, especially after reading this blog that is available for everyone to see worldwide. It wont just defame Uber in America, but all around the world for practicing such sexist acts against women. Even the existing small percentage of women working there would also end up leaving, even for lower pay if they are given a comfortable environment to work in and more opportunities. Having only 3% engineers who are women is also quite disturbing as there is a huge gender disparity, leading to a discouragement of both men and women to work there. As a result, they may lose the chance of working with some of the best talent, who may end up going to work for Uber’s competitors. Moreover, not giving a promotion to employees when they are fully worthy of it, and then lying about it for manager’s personal gain of looking good as he has more female engineers working for him, shows political instability within the Uber environment, which can be demoralizing for all its employees, resulting in loss of motivation, reduced efficiency, and effectiveness. This can also highly increase the chances of lawsuits filed against them, which will not be helpful for Uber’s already weak situation. Uber is also highly likely to lose the lawsuits as many of its employees have records of what they did, just like Susan had. This will also lead to huge costs, which Uber cannot afford, with what so much going on. Furthermore, management’s failure to provide clear and concise goals will also lead to confusion among employees and a loss of commitment, not just to the task but to Uber as well. This event, hence, can also lead to the conclusion that Uber, as a team, is not working together towards improving the brand image and its brand equity; due to this, they end up making independent decisions that are not suitable for the whole company. Although keeping customers and internal employees satisfied is a pinnacle for any business success, ensuring external employee happiness has also never been a priority for Uber. In fact, Uber failed to realize that happy drivers would mean efficient employees, better work cultures that translate to happier customers. Mistreatment of its drivers and the video going viral (Exhibit 11) are some of the factors that led to the deterioration of its brand over years as the loss of drivers led to slower growth rate compared to its competitors Lyft (Exhibit 3). Hence, these negative reviews and mistreatment of drivers can be a threat for Uber by affecting future driver’s ability to drive for Uber and instead drive for competitors, which can hurt the company’s brand equity (no one wants to be involved with immoral company) as the drivers are the main channel for bringing sales and connecting with users. Due to this, Uber lost $1.27 billion in first half of 2016.   Keeping employees satisfied is important but Uber losing 400,000 drivers mean more cost of hiring new replacement drivers, which can be time consuming and will inevitably increase Uber’s expenses. This loss was due to drivers being unsatisfied because compared to the competitors like Lyft   uber drivers did not have a tip app and as a result they were required to work long extensive hours each week to make up for it due to most Uber users not having cash on hand. For instance, in order for a driver now to make $50,000, the breakeven point for the drivers to drive to reach this point is 60.21 trips each week (exhibit 15). This can put a lot of stress on the drivers and provides drivers with fewer opportunities to grow within Uber, which results in frustration for drivers. As a result, Uber’s weakness of not compensating the drivers to keep them satisfied is another reason for leaving Uber as they can get much higher pay through working with Uber’s competitors which means higher turnover rate. For Uber the opportunity to get back on a steady growth lies in their ability to further prevent losing their drivers because without drivers Uber would cease to exist in future.If consumers and drivers were to continue to share their frustrating experience with Uber, these bad information streaming in social media networks can affect the perception that people feel about the brands which can deteriorate its brand for long period of time (Exhibit 5). Through CSR, firms can build their reputation, competitiveness; drive innovation and thus leading to sustainable profits, which Uber failed to do so. By not building employee (internal & external) and customer   loyalty lead to less attraction of new investors because Uber does not have a good visibility of their sustainability and do not show transparency in their decisions that will create sustainable development of society. In conclusion, Uber needs to communicate a better image to the customers. They need to modify their value proposition, and emphasize on making social change instead of just focusing on low cost and easy access (Exhibit 18). They need to understand that social media is a very important aspect in the lives of the millennials, and they should use it to their advantage by spreading a better image of themselves. Their actions are not going to be tolerated by their core customers if its value proposition does not resonate with them. Being professional in the workplace, having a strategic management that focuses on making strategic decisions that are going to help Uber generate money not only in the short run, but in the longer run as well, and focusing on satisfying their employees and customers is going to make Uber successful in this era. Uber hence needs to seriously rebrand itself if it wants to survive in this market. RECOMMENDATIONS Firstly, Uber needs to have a public apology for their actions in the last few months before Uber rebrands on social and live press conference. In each of the three incidents discussed in analysis, never once did Uber directly apologize to the public for its mistakes. Nowadays, the general public places an extremely high value upon clarity and transparency, and hence coming clean and admitting that they have spent numerously on less important aspects when they should have tried to launch social initiatives is one step closer to rebranding itself. Also, Uber needs to explain how it is initiating changes to make up for mistakes so that it will not happen again in the future. This should stop outrage and reduce harm done to the company as a result of widespread of negative publicity. Secondly, Uber needs to replace the current CEO, Travis Kalanick. Uber can make him a part of the board of directors with most voting shares instead of keeping him as the face of Uber. This is because the CEO is directly or indirectly responsible in all three incidents. The public will very likely hold the CEO responsible for all three incidents or associate him with negative publicity since he is the face of the company. Thus, rebranding changes would not be as effective if Kalanick remains the CEO. Hence, replacing him is vital if Uber wants to make changes and want the public re-evaluate Uber based on the changes made. The new CEO should be a woman that has experience running a business, is a women’s’ activist, has experience with CSR, and has helped with rebranding. Giving an important position to female would suggest gender equality which will offset the negative effects caused by Susan’s sexism blog. A CEO with these qualifications would be able make better decisions for Uber to get it through this difficult time. Thirdly, involving Uber drivers in the decision making process by hosting a Company Town Hall meeting for all Uber drivers in each city per quarter to discuss Uber agendas, driver concerns, and new opportunities. This can improve Ubers’ turnover because more Uber drivers will understand the business decisions of the company. This meeting will also address concerns of drivers because over the years they have felt that their concerns are not being met and taken into consideration. They can do this by sending surveys and questionnaires via email related to any decision that might directly affect the drivers. Also, emails can be sent after every meeting regarding the conversation so that even those drivers who were not able to attend will have a better idea of what is happening in Uber. Moreover, Uber should create a loyalty program that encourages more drivers to stay with Uber, thereby reducing turnover. This loyalty program will judge the drivers under two criterion; number of rides and drivers’ ratings. The driver will be considered more valuable when the number of rides are high and they get consistent high ratings. There will be three levels; bronze, silver, and gold. If the driver reaches 2000 rides in one year with consistent high ratings, s/he will earn a bronze medal, which provides incentive of a $50 gift card to their favorite retail store or 3 free meals at a restaurant of their choosing. If the driver reaches 2800 rides in one year with high ratings, they will earn a silver medal where Uber provides them with a $100 gift card and 6 free meals at any restaurant of their choosing. If an Uber driver reaches 3500 rides in one year and be in the top 50 rated drivers in their city, they will have earned a Gold medal. This gold medal will give the Uber driver free gym membership (to show that Uber cares for their drivers’ health), $100 gift card, and will give them 90% of the rides hare money than the 80% for the Silver and Bronze. The Gold drivers will also be recognized in the Company’s Town Hall meeting as a recognition of their hard work and loyalty to the company. Because this program is a goal oriented approach, it will give Uber drivers more motivation to stay, as they are recognized in the decision making process and are given benefits. This will hence inevitably change the perception of the company. Also, encourage Uber drivers to have a video camera in their cars because it will bring more safety for the drivers and allow Uber to adjust their ratings due to false claims by customers because there will be proof that the driver was not at fault. Uber management should also look over the data of the rating of drivers to make sure that discrepancies are found to show that drivers’ ratings are important for the company. Uber should also start a tip feature because most of the customers do not carry cash with them as it is done through the Uber app. Therefore, creating a feature where the drivers can earn tips can provide them a way of earning more money which will further motivate them to stay with Uber. Furthermore, it should change its HR team, and hire individuals who have proper knowledge and experience in maintaining a safe and motivational environment for its employees. A good HR team that is approachable, respectful, just, motivated, and innovative will slowly but inevitably win back the confidence of its employees, who can then be more motivated and efficient, and work towards rebuilding the perception of Uber as well. The new HR team should carefully select diverse talented employees who can fit in and be successful in the new work environment of Uber. Additionally, training should be provided to the new employees, with a separate conference about sexual harassment in the workplace; which talks about what sexual harassment is, what to do and whom to go to, what must be done and the consequences of harassment. Showing that in the beginning will ensure that new employees know how important safety of its employees is to Uber. A guidebook should be provided to every new employee so that everyone has a written copy about the rules of Uber’s culture. There should also be brochures on the boards, on which clear guidelines should be provided for anyone who faces harassment. A safe and just environment will hence not just motivate men to apply, but also gain back the trust of women. Uber will be able to then increase the number of women employees in its company. On top of that, it should build a whistleblowing department where anyone can report legal or ethical concerns while being anonymous. Simultaneously, whistleblowing should not just be legal, but should be encouraged within Uber, so that employees are motivated to speak against unjust actions and Uber can maintain a company where it internalizes fair and just policies for everyone. Moreover, there should be evaluations of employees as well as managers every six months. Managers should evaluate their subordinates but the employees should also get a chance to evaluate the managers so that managers’ skills and effectiveness can be measured, and proper feedback as well as training be provided if they lack certain skills as a manager, which will help them grow within the business. When it comes to the employees, feedback should be provided, and follow-ups should be mandatory for employees to help them acquire greater skills and help them grow for more growth opportunities within the workplace. Moreover, the value proposition and the colors of the brand logo need to be changed to mark major changes that are about to occur. As mentioned in the analysis, Uber needs to modify value proposition to emphasize social changes and show that Uber cares about society too. Uber’s current value proposition is too mechanical and lacks emotional component to it, which leads to the perception of Uber being a revenue generator. Uber’s logo should be changed to purple as it represents nobility, royalty, peace, pride and dignity; all of which should represent Uber. Value proposition that focuses on social initiatives should be written and posted clearly on their website for easy access to everyone. With the right colors and the right messages, consumers’ willingness to give Uber a second chance will rise and Uber can be successful in re-branding itself.    Lastly, what Uber must do is think up of a creative way to help better the society. Hence, in our opinion, Uber should set $200,000 apart and sponsor refugee families from different countries. Because it takes on average $30,000 to sponsor a family of four, targeting for five families this year is more than enough. Uber should then have a separate team that helps them settle in, and help them with the driving licenses so that they can work for Uber to generate income. This will slowly minimize people’s perception of Uber as a revenue generator and expander, and people will start thinking of them as a company that wants social change. Pictures of the refugees and their stories should be the first thing that people should see when they open their website. Because word of mouth was the main source of advertisement before, they can change that to making visual ads for YouTube advertisement that cannot be skipped, where stories of refugees and how Uber helped them is emphasized. The campaign name should be catchy, for e.g. â€Å"We Change, They Change, Life Changes,† which will force people to see how Uber is striving to change. In the longer run, however, they can also start a women empowerment initiative in third world countries which will further improve their image. These are some of the mandatory changes that Uber must do to survive within this competitive market. However, it needs to realize that being innovative is just not enough nowadays as that does not set you apart from the competitors; a company needs to take social initiatives, be ethical, and focus on CSR to have a competitive advantage. Hence, Uber needs to realize that while these are the answers to the current problems, it needs to internalize these solutions within its environment and take continuous social actions in the longer run, to help make a difference. Bibliography Abboud, Leila. (2017, March 16). Uber’s $69 Billion Dilemma. Retrieved from March 17,2017 from https://www.bloomberg.com/gadfly/articles/2017-03-16/uber-needs-to-get-real-about-that-69-billion-price-tag Fowler, S. J. (2017, February 19). Reflecting on one very, very strange year at Uber. Retrieved March 11, 2017, from https://www.susanjfowler.com/blog/2017/2/19/reflecting-on-one-very-strange-year-at-uber Google. (n.d). Google Trends. Retrieved March 17,2017, from https://trends.google.ca/trends/explore?date=2017-02-16%202017-03-16&q=uber%20ceo,uber%20sexism Google. (n.d.). Retrieved March 17, 2017, from https://www.google.ca/#q=companies that offer benefits cost& G. (n.d.). The Demographics of Ubers US Users. Retrieved February 28, 2017, from https://www.globalwebindex.net/blog/the-demographics-of-ubers-us-users Google pictures. (n.d.) What is uber. Retrieved March 18,2017, from https://what-is-uber.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/12/what-is-uber-uber-app-and-how-to-ride-uber.jpg Intelligence, S. (2016, December 07). These latest Uber statistics show how its dominating Lyft. Retrieved March 17, 2017, from https://medium.com/@sm_app_intel/these-latest-uber-statistics-show-how-its-dominating-lyft-53f6b255de5e#.ans63grjq Juggernaut. (2015, September 24). How Uber Works:Insights into Business & Revenue Model. Retrieved March 17,2017, from http://nextjuggernaut.com/blog/how-uber-works-business-model-revenue-uber-insights/ Kosoff, M. (2016, June 16). Why Is Uber Raising So Much Money? Retrieved February 28, 2017, from http://www.vanityfair.com/news/2016/06/why-is-uber-raising-so-much-money Kuo, John. (2016, October 19). Here’s How Much You need to Drive for Uber and Lyft to Cover Car Insurance, Other Costs, Retrieved March 18,2017, from https://www.nerdwallet.com/blog/insurance/number-rides-pay-insurance-lyft-uber/ Marshall, A. (2017, February 28). Google’s Robocar Lawsuit Could Kill Uber’s Future and Send Execs to Prison. Retrieved February 28, 2017, from https://www.wired.com/2017/02/googles-robocar-lawsuit-kill-ubers-future-send-execs-prison Newcomer, E. (2016, December 19). Ubers Loss Exceeds $800 Million in Third Quarter on $1.7 Billion in Net Revenue. Retrieved March 17, 2017, from https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2016-12-20/uber-s-loss-exceeds-800-million-in-third-quarter-on-1-7-billion-in-net-revenue Nunez, Michael. (2016, August 25). Retrieved Feburary 28,2017, from http://gizmodo.com/why-uber-is-losing-money-faster-than-any-tech-company-e-1785736918 Research Papers Center. (2004, June 25). The 5S principles of crisis response. Retrieved from March 17,2017 from http://eng.hi138.com/marketing/200406/192595_the-5s-principles-of-crisis-response.asp#.WMMquPWcGW9 Sonders, Soners (2016, December 7). These latest Uber statistics show how it’s dominating Lyft. Retrieved March 17,2017, from https://medium.com/@sm_app_intel/these-latest-uber-statistics-show-how-its-dominating-lyft-53f6b255de5e#.ans63grjq Staff, I. (2015, August 12). Initial Public Offering IPO. Retrieved March 18, 2017, from http://www.investopedia.com/terms/i/ipo.asp Stahl, A. (2016, May 06). A Millennial Manifesto: Why Gen Y Will Change The World. Retrieved March 09, 2017, from https://www.forbes.com/sites/ashleystahl/2016/04/28/a-millennial-manifesto/#58ca08192616 Uber and Lyfts Growth Is Slowing in Most Major U.S. Cities. (2016, October 12). Retrieved February 28, 2017, from https://skift.com/2016/10/12/uber-and-lyfts-growth-is-slowing-in-most-major-u-s-cities/ The 5S principles of crisis response. (n.d.). Retrieved March 19, 2017, from http://eng.hi138.com/marketing/200406/192595_the-5s-principles-of-crisis-response.asp#.WMMquPWcGW9 Toossi, M. (2002, May). A century of change: the U.S. labor force, 1950–2050. Retrieved March 18, 2017, from https://www.bls.gov/opub/mlr/2002/05/art2full.pdf Uber Cities. (n.d.). Retrieved February 28, 2017, from http://uberestimator.com/cities Uber Fare Estimator & Surge Prices. (n.d.). Retrieved February 28, 2017, from http://uberestimate.com/ Uber – SWOT analysis. (2017, January 29). Retrieved February 28, 2017, from http://blog.cayenneapps.com/2015/02/09/the-swot-analysis-for-uber/ Uber. (n.d.). Retrieved February 28, 2017, from http://adsoftheworld.com/taxonomy/brand/uber Youtube. (2017, Feburary 28). Uber CEO Apologizes for Disrespectful Interaction With Driver. Retrieved March 17,2017, from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZHKfvnnXVDI Exhibit 1 Exhibit 2 Exhibit 3 Exhibit 4 Exhibit 5 Exhibit 6 Exhibit 7 Exhibit 8 Exhibit 9 Exhibit 10 Exhibit 11:Google Trend Sexual Harrasment &   Uber CEO Scandal Exhibit 12 Exhibit 13: Uber CEO Scandal Image and Conversation Exhibit 14 Exhibit 15 Exhibit 16 Exhibit 17 Exhibit 18 Exhibit B: SWOT Analysis

Sin Taxes

Principles and Processes of Government Budgeting| Sin Taxes, Good or Bad? | An Examination of the Use of Sin Taxes in the United States| By: Stacy Madden4/27/2012 | Executive Summary Historically sin taxes have been an effective and efficient way for the government to raise revenue. The federal government used tariffs and consumption taxes to generate almost all of its revenue in the early years of our nation. The tax structure and philosophy has evolved and changed since the beginning of our nation, however the use of sin taxes has remained a good way for governments to raise revenues.Sin taxes no longer provide a significant portion of federal or state governments; however they do provide a consistent stream of revenue. This paper examines the use of sin taxes in the United States. First, the paper provides a basic understanding of sin taxes, current definition, and history. Next, the paper outlines the goods and services most commonly targeted by sin taxes and provides information about the effectiveness of these taxes to raise revenue and accomplish policy outcomes.Common goods and services targeted by sin taxes include; tobacco, alcohol, fuel, hazardous chemicals, gambling, prostitution, pornography, and unhealthy foods. Lastly, the paper will examine the ethical and moral implications of sin taxes from the perspective of those who support and oppose the use of sin taxes in the United States. Introduction Ben Franklin adequately stated the importance of taxes with his famous quote, â€Å"but in the world nothing can be said to be certain except death and taxes. Citizens have vested governments with the power to tax in order to provide services for the common good. There are many different ways for a government to tax its citizens in order to raise revenues, ranging from taxes on income, wealth, and property, to taxes on goods and services. The United States uses many of these taxes in varying levels to raise the needed funds to carry out government busine ss. Some taxes are generally accepted and uncontested, while others are highly politicized and hard for Americans to accept.Presently, the federal government relies on income taxes for the bulk of its revenue whereas states and localities rely more heavily on other forms of taxes to raise money for their functions. The primary function of taxes is to raise revenue for the government, however governments have used taxes to help spark social change, punish those who partake of certain goods and services, or regulate the consumption of specific goods and services. In these instances, taxes move from matters of revenue to issues of social policy, acting as mechanisms to force certain behaviors from citizens.More specifically, sin taxes have been used in the United States to help change behavior or regulate the consumption of goods and services deemed as sinful. In this paper, I will define sin taxes and outline the political meaning of â€Å"sin,† provide a brief history of sin t axes and their use, examine the most common forms of sin taxes in the United States, and lastly discuss the ethical and moral implication of utilizing sin taxes as a mechanism of social change. Sin Tax, a DefinitionBefore considering the implications of sin taxes and their influence on the behavior of Americans, it is important to define the term. Taxes, most generally, are levied by governments to raise revenue in order to conduct business in the public interest. The United States, utilizing a progressive income tax to raise the bulk of its revenue, possess a culture where citizens pay most of their taxes on time. (Mikesell 493) This system is not one that commonly uses taxes as a punishment, instead encouraging its citizens to pay their taxes for the common good and success of the nation as a whole.Noncompliance is low, and the government has even employed strategies to enhance payment, such as instruction and assistance. (Mikesell 494) Sin taxes, however, do not take this positiv e approach to raise revenue, instead, governments use their powers of taxation to punish behaviors when utilizing sin taxes. Most commonly, sin taxes are excise or consumption taxes that charge fees for guilty pleasures or human indulgence. Lorenzi, Sin Taxes 60) Sin taxes, therefore, are intended to encourage citizens to consume or use taxed items responsibly or discourage behavior associated with the consumption of taxed items. Goods or services generally taxed through sin tax policy have some common characteristics including inelastic demand, promote behavior that is harmful to the individual, and promote behavior that is harmful to others.Goods or services targeted by sin taxes have an inelastic demand because they are generally habitual, addictive, or highly pleasurable. Lorenzi, Sin Taxes 60) Further, these goods or services are targeted by sin tax legislation because consuming or utilizing the good or services can lead to self-destructive behavior, negative consequences for c ommunities, and generally are considered socially undesirable. Thus, sin taxes are not prohibitive; citizens are allowed to consume targeted goods and services as long as the tax is not steep enough to make consumption of the good or service impossible. Viscusi 556) Further, the voluntary nature of sin taxes is generally more tolerable than involuntary nature of income taxes. (Schmidt, Barr and Swanson 1677) The most confusing and controversial element when considering sin taxes is the definition of sin.This word can be highly political and misleading, automatically making most think of sin in religious terms. However, sin, in the context of sin taxes, refers to addictive, self-destructive, and socially undesirable, behavior from the consumption of goods and services without crossing into religious doctrine. Lorenzi, Sin Taxes 60) In this context, then, sin is behavior that is undesirable enough to be targeted by taxes as a form of regulation or determent, but not so socially unacce ptable to be illegal to the public. (Lorenzi, Sin Taxes 60) Therefore, sin taxes should not be considered as forms of punishment for poor consumption choices, but instead be a catalyst to foster sounder and safer decisions. (Viscusi 547) However, this can be a slippery slope, the limited use of taxes on goods and services deemed as sinful could grow and encompass others outside the scope of sin.Sin Tax History Sin taxes have a long history, originating with religious doctrine and the power of organized religions to collect fees. Popes levied the earliest forms of sin taxes on prostitutes, brothels, and the sale of indulgence to raise money for religious projects. (Lorenzi, Sin Taxes 59) Laws required prostitutes to designate half of her property and fortune to convents, and brothels were taxed continuing through the 16th century. Lorenzi, Sin Taxes 59) Further, Russian Czar Peter the Great imposed fees on the length of beards to tax vanity, and the Puritans used sin taxes to curb ex travagance. (Lorenzi, Sin Taxes 59)The United States has a long history of utilizing taxes on socially undesirable goods and services to fund the government. In the early years of our democracy, the federal Government derived almost all its revenue from consumption taxes in the form of duties on imports and excise taxes on liquors and tobacco. American Economic Association 50) This tradition was set early when Congress enacted excise taxes on tobacco and snuff, refined sugar, distilled spirits, carriages, and property sold at auctions in order to finance the debts incurred during the Revolutionary War. (Hines 51) However, these taxes were not well received by a public that was over taxed by the British government and violent protests, in what was later coined the Whiskey Rebellion, resulted in the abolition of many unpopular excise taxes during the Jefferson Administration. Hines 52)The War of 1812 and the Civil War both required the federal Government to raise revenue and as a resu lt old excise taxes were reinstated as well as taxes on gold, jewelry, silverware, watches, playing cards, feathers, patent medicines, billiard tables, leather, telegrams, yachts, and many other luxuries, however these taxes were quickly repealed once the wars were over. (Hines 62) The federal Government was permitted to levy a personal income tax with the 16th Amendment, which became the main source of revenue in 1913. Hines) Federal excise taxes did not completely disappear during this time; however prohibition severely limited the possible revenue of excise taxes before the Depression.The repeal of Prohibition and expansion of excise taxes on luxuries during the Depression helped to finance the increased federal spending of the New Deal Programs totaling more than 15 percent of the federal revenue in 1933. Hines 52) The expansion of programming during and following World War II required higher income taxes, fully transferring the bulk of government revenue away from excise and co nsumption taxes to the system we employ today. (Hines) The federal government still utilized some consumption and excise taxes, however these were limited to those goods and services mostly deemed socially undesirable, or sin taxes. Popular Goods and Services Taxed as â€Å"Sin† Tobacco and Alcohol The scope of goods and services targeted by sin taxes is limited in American society.The two oldest and most widely targeted goods are tobacco and alcohol. As evidenced in the history of sin taxes, alcohol and tobacco have been taxed to finance federal and state governments, particularly in slow fiscal times or to raise money for major legislation or wars. These goods have been targeted by sin tax legislation because they have the potential to raise money rather quickly, have been relatively accepted as sinful, and have direct casual relationships with health or social problems. Hines 63) Further, it is easier for governments to justify taxes on tobacco and alcohol to the public si nce both goods tend to have negative consequences for the public at large. Legislators can disguise taxes on tobacco and alcohol as regulations to help protect society from the health and social consequences resulting from overconsumption of these goods while requiring those who consume tobacco and alcohol to finance the consequences of their consumption choices. (Boyd and Seldon 365) Thus, in times of increasing taxes it is easier and more popular to increase taxes on goods instead of taxes on income.Cigarettes have been a major target of sin taxes in most recent history as the health risks have been widely publicized. In order to combat cigarette consumption, the federal government and many states have levied taxes on the production and/or sale of cigarettes. The rationale behind this tax is quite simple, those who partake in the pleasure of smoking should help pay for the health care required resulting from their choice. (Gruber 203) Today, all states and the federal government i mpose an excise tax on cigarettes, and these taxes are increasing as governments try to balance their budgets. American Medical Association 1909)Cigarette excise taxes are widely accepted in public opinion, the hazards of smoking have demonized the industry and those who choose to purchase the products. (Gruber 194) Utilizing sin taxation to regulate consumption of tobacco has been highly effective, according to the CDC, â€Å"A 10% increase in the price of cigarettes can reduce consumption by nearly 4% among adults and can have an even greater effect among youths and other price-sensitive groups. (American Medical Association 1909) Sin taxation on alcohol, while a widely targeted good, seems to be less popular and publicized in popular media. Taxes on alcohol tend to be lower than those on tobacco, and many states handle the sale of alcohol differently (alcohol license tax, state operated liquor stores, etc. ), making the tax less visible to the public. (Johnson and Meier 580) Fur ther, it is harder to gauge the effect specific liquor, beer, and wine taxes have on consumption.For example, higher taxes increasing the price on one might cause consumers to substitute to another, more affordable alternative, such as substituting wine with beer. (Johnson and Meier 591) However, studies show increased prices on alcohol as a result of taxation have affected alcohol consumption rates to an extent even if it is minimal. (Boyd and Seldon 365) Sin taxation on both tobacco and alcohol have seemed to decrease the consumption of these goods while raising revenues for state and federal governments, however little attention is given to other factors affecting decreasing consumption rates.The American public has been flooded with messages about the dangers of smoking and national campaigns have worked to warn Americans to stop smoking, helping to decrease cigarette consumption in the United States along with the steep sin taxes increasing the prices. Further, many cities and states are adopting smoking bans in public places, limiting the accessibility of facilities for smokers. Also, there are very few substitutes for tobacco products, forcing smokers to either pay the tax or consume less.Political movements and tougher legislation against behavior resulting from alcohol consumption might be affecting consumption rates just as easily as increased prices resulting from sin taxes. Taxes on alcohol and tobacco can also increase production costs, causing producers to utilize their resources to raise other commodities that are not as heavily taxed, decreasing the overall production of tobacco and alcohol products. Boyd and Seldon 370) Further, lower consumption rates may not mean that consumption is actually dropping if consumers are turning to affordable black market substitutes. (Johnson and Meier 591) Environmental Americans have become increasingly accustomed to sin taxes that will help promote safer environmental practices and sustainability. Increased understanding of environmental factors surrounding pollution has increased the need for governmental regulation of emissions. As a result, the federal government has levied taxes on goods and services that contribute to pollution.The most common of these taxes is that on fuel; gasoline and diesel. Sin taxes levied on gasoline are intended to discourage driving and reduce pollution as well as traffic congestion in the process. (Hines 52) This tax is easy for government to justify since the majority of funds raised from the tax are spent on highway maintenance and construction. (Hines 52) While this tax may not have been enacted with â€Å"sin† regulation in mind, environmental regulation helps to justify it now, putting it in the â€Å"sin† category.Environmental sin taxes are not limited to fuel; they are also levied on gas-guzzler cars, heavy road vehicles, highway-type tires, and all forms of air transportation. (Hines 53) Ozone depleting chemicals also present an op portunity to tax environmental sin. Not only does the federal government limit the use of these hazardous chemicals, they are also taxed. (Hines 53) The strict regulation and higher taxes on these chemicals has severely reduced their production and use, almost making the usage limits irrelevant. Hines 53) In the future, scaled taxes on specific chemicals could help further reduce their use and potential harm to the ozone, however the federal government has not utilized sin taxes thoroughly enough to enact further environmental regulation. Gambling, Prostitution, and Pornography Gambling is a service that has been a target of sin taxes since the early years of our nation, easily defined as a sin but harder to single out and tax since it is not a good. The federal government has not taxed gambling with the same enthusiasm as tobacco, alcohol, or fuel taxes.Taxing gambling in the United States is tricky, Native American and state sponsored gambling is tax free, and setting gambling tax es too high can cause taxpayers to turn to alternatives, such as illegal gaming establishments. (Schmidt, Barr and Swanson 1682) Further, it is harder for consumers to feel the effects of gambling taxes since most tax costs are not directly funded by service prices. Instead, most sin taxes are levied on the gaming establishments in the form of license agreements for specific games or total revenue. Schmidt, Barr and Swanson 1687) Thus, gambling taxes do not technically raise the cost of the service and encourage citizens to make better decisions, instead gambling establishments bear the majority of the burden of the tax cost. While gambling sin taxes are hard to levy on individuals for regulation, they can be a tool to monitor and stop organized crime through IRS oversight. (Schmidt, Barr and Swanson 1681) Prostitution and pornography are equally difficult to tax, each for their own, separate reasons.Prostitution, while generally considered immoral, is legal in some states and on pa per is considered victimless since it is a consensual act between two adults. (Lorenzi, Taxing Antisocial Behavior for the Common Good 331) Further, taxes in this industry generally are levied on the establishment, much like gambling, and if the tax becomes too high, consumers will look for substitutes, generally illegal. Pornography is equally as difficult to tax, since so much of this product is available online.States are still trying to figure out how to charge a sales tax on online purchases, rather unsuccessfully, and pornography is no exception. Thus, taxes on this industry are limited to taxes on producers and networks, not individual consumers. (Lorenzi, Taxing Antisocial Behavior for the Common Good 331) In the end, taxes on prostitution and pornography are not as readily apparent to the consumer as with tobacco, alcohol or fuel, reducing the individual deterrent qualities of a sin tax on these goods and services. Fat TaxesObesity rates in the United States have been risin g, and as a result so have health issues and healthcare costs. (Chaufan, Hong and Fox 87) In recent years, state and federal governments have debated utilizing sin taxes to raise the cost of purchasing calorie dense foods with no nutritional value in order to deter consumption. However, these â€Å"fat taxes† are not new and have been present since the 1920’s. (Creighton 127) They are gaining in popularity as the obesity epidemic continues to cause widespread health issues.These unhealthy goods are particularly targeted by health officials because they are most commonly marketed to kids, and children who develop poor eating habits when they are young and more likely to become obese as adults. (Fletcher, Frisvold and Tefft 968) Thus, with evidence from the tobacco industry, sin taxes on unhealthy goods would seem to be a good method to encourage healthier food purchases. Further, taxing these goods could provide huge revenue increases for federal and state governments s ince the unhealthy food industry profits are similar to those of the alcohol industry. Fletcher, Frisvold and Tefft 968) Utilizing taxes as a mechanism to change behavior has not been as successful for curbing obesity. Taxing soft drinks has proved to discourage consumption, particularly for children and groups with limited spending capability. (Fletcher, Frisvold and Tefft 972) However, changing behaviors that lead to obesity takes more than just cutting specific foods out of a diet. For example, diets high in caloric intake can cause obesity regardless of where the calories are coming from if a person does not get enough exercise.Curbing obesity almost requires a personalized plan for each individual, focusing not only on their diet, but also exercise habits, genetic makeup, and lifestyle. (Chaufan, Hong and Fox 88) Simply targeting one factor does not help fix problems with the other factors. Further, there are too many substitutes for unhealthy junk food, allowing citizens to co ntinue to make poor health choices, even if we target certain goods. (O'Donoghue and Rabin 1841) Ethical and Moral Considerations of Sin TaxesSin taxes can be a valuable tool for government to raise revenue and help shape social policy. However, adding morals and values to a tax requires ethical and moral considerations above those of most other forms of taxes. These taxes are levied with a specific policy outcome in mind, yet sometimes it may be difficult to separate the government’s interest in raising revenue with the government’s overarching policy goal. Since these taxes generally have some sort of stigma attached with the goods or services taxed, it is also important to ensure these tax policies are enacted for the common good.Sin taxes have been the target of moral and ethical discussions mainly because it is hard to decide what exactly constitutes a sin. Disputes arise as legislators decide what goods and services need to be regulated for the public wellbeing. While many of the goods and services taxed as sin have historically been deemed evil, immoral, seedy, or bad; discourse about who decides these products deserve to be regulated and taxed above and beyond other goods and services must be evaluated. This seems to be the central moral question surrounding sin taxes.Should a minority of the population have to pay an extra tax to support the government simply because they partake or utilize a specific good or service? Taking this question a step further, sin taxes have the potential to raise large revenues, so is it ethical to make a few pay for government services for all? Who gets to decide how these funds will be spent, and who or what will this spending affect? (Green 70) The last overarching question surrounding the sin taxes focuses on the government’s power to tax, namely, can the government use its power to tax to shape and enforce social policies?Those in favor of sin taxes would argue there are many reasons why it is mor al and ethical to require consumers who purchase these particular goods and services to pay more than the average taxpayer. Namely, sin taxes target goods and services that cause negative consequences for the public at large. (Green 68) These could be increased health care costs or higher demand for social services. It is logical, then, to require these consumers to pay more since they are directly contributing to higher government costs for all.Not only is it logical and moral to require these consumers to pay more for the added costs as a result of their consumption, higher taxes can help them make better, healthier choices. Sin taxes have been proven to reduce the consumption of specific goods and services, helping to create sustainable, prosocial behaviors for the future. (Lorenzi, Taxing Antisocial Behavior for the Common Good 328) Sin tax policies can help deter and regulate antisocial behaviors as a result of consumption of sin goods and services while simultaneously raising revenues to pay for the programming needed to help those affected by this behavior.Further, sin taxes raising money on the backs of those partaking in antisocial behavior reduce the need to tax prosocial behaviors. For example, revenue generated from sin taxes can be used to fund government business, reducing income tax costs for the larger population. (Lorenzi, Sin Taxes) Targeting these immoral behaviors and using them to fund governmental operations ensures those engaged in prosocial behavior are not bearing a larger share of the cost of government. This is an attractive and easy sale to the public since higher taxes make all citizens unhappy.Sin taxes on paper are extremely regressive, and as a result unfavorable to many. However, lifetime incidence studies prove the effects of these taxes on lower income taxpayers is about equal to those in middle or higher income households. (Poterba 327) Those who oppose sin taxes see the value they bring to both government revenues as well a s the common good; however these positives do not outweigh the negative ethical and moral implications. First and foremost, opponents of sin taxes believe it is immoral for the government to rely on funding from the very behaviors it has deemed sinful and therefore is trying to regulate or change. Lorenzi, The Moral Grounds of Sin Taxes 68) Opponents see sin taxes as a stepping stone to banning certain goods and services, which should be a social policy decision supported by the public, not forced on them through prohibitive taxes. (Viscusi 547) Opponents therefore do not believe taxes should be used as a mechanism to enforce social policies or enact social change. (Creighton 135) In essence, the government is taking away the individual’s autonomy, legislating they should not purchase certain goods and products. (Green 72) This is a difficult issue to balance, Americans value independence and the freedom to choose.Further, sin taxes are regressive, putting the large burden of payment on those with the least ability to pay. (Hines 65) In slow economic times, when governments tend to raise sin taxes to help close the revenue and expenditure gap, sin taxes could actually hurt the economy, pushing these citizens to the end of their economic resources. (Johnson and Meier 582) In the end, the same population the government is targeting to raise the revenue would be the same population in need of government services once their resources were depleted.Further, utilizing sin taxes as a form of punishment or regulation directly competes with the message of the general tax code, namely, every citizen has the obligation to pay their taxes and support the government. The United States evolved their tax system from one based on consumption and tariffs to one based on taxing income based on the ability to pay. Sin taxes do not fit fairly into this carefully crafted tax structure we use today, sending the public mixed messages about citizen’s role in the taxatio n process. Lastly, opponents of sin taxes are skeptical if they are actually reaching the policy outcomes intended.Studies show increased prices on certain goods and services reduces consumption, however there could be many other factors contributing to the decline in usage. For example, reduced consumption might be a result of heightened public awareness about the health risks, greater access to prevention and rehabilitation, harsher criminal legislation surrounding a specific behavior, or any number of other factors. Further, sin taxes on some goods, like unhealthy foods, really do not work at all since there are so many additional factors that might be contributing to the issue. Chaufan, Hong and Fox 87) Opponents also are skeptical sin taxes even reduce consumption since the presence of similar or equal substitutes might encourage consumers to find these goods and services elsewhere, such as illegal gambling establishments or black market cigarettes. (Johnson and Meier 591) The availability of substitutes could in turn create greater antisocial behavior and costs to the government in the form of criminal investigation, prevention, and added health risks from unsafe goods and services. ConclusionTaxes are an inevitable fee all must pay to support the government. Citizens vest the power to tax with governments in return for government services. Governments take the power to tax a step further with sin taxes, not only raising revenue but also enacting or enforcing social policy. Sin taxes have been used successfully throughout history, particularly when citizens unanimously agree a sin exists. Sin taxes have also been successful in regulating or curbing consumption resulting in antisocial behavior as well as generating revenue.On the surface, it would seem as if sin taxes are a great way to raise revenues and influence or enforce social policy. However, there are many ethical and moral implications surrounding sin taxes. Digging deeper into the positive and n egative consequences of these taxes sheds light on the inherent problematic nature of the tax, and leads to questions about its place in the American tax structure. Legislators must be cognizant of these moral and ethical questions before deciding to enact taxes that could potentially be discriminatory to some members of society.These taxes should be evaluated on a case by case basis, with clear and measureable policy outcomes included in the evaluation. Policy outcomes that are not easily measured may not be the best use of sin tax influence for social change. In the end, taxes on goods or services labeled as sinful have great potential to raise revenue, and as a result these taxes are popular to help close revenue and expenditure gaps. Perhaps sin taxes are a great case study for tax structures based on consumption instead of income. Hines 69) Sin taxes target consumption, and this seems to work well to raise revenue for the government. Many of the ethical and moral questions surr ounding the use of sin taxes to influence social change could be eliminated within a tax structure based on consumption; however this shift would be a major tax reform in the United States. This may not be the answer we are looking for, yet sin taxes provide a window in which to examine tax policy, and possibly change the way our tax structures work in the future.Works Cited American Economic Association. Consumption and Other Indirect Taxes. † American Economic Review 9 (1919): 49-62. American Medical Association. â€Å"State Cigarette Excise Taxes-United States, 2009. † MMWR: Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report. 2010. Boyd, Roy and Barry J. Seldon. â€Å"Revenue and Land-Use Effects of Proposed Changes in Sin Taxes: A General Equilibrium Perspective. † Land Economics 67. 3 (1991): 365-374. Chaufan, Claudia, Gee Hee Hong and Patrick Fox. â€Å"†Sin-Food† Taxes and Sugar-Sweetened Beverages–The Right Policy For the Wrong Reasons? † Ame rican Journal of Health Promotion 25. (2010): 87-90. Creighton, Robert. â€Å"Fat Taxes: The Newest Manifestation of the Age-Old Excise Tax. † Journal of Legal Medicine 31 (2010): 123-136. Fletcher, Jason M. , David E. Frisvold and Nathan Tefft. â€Å"The Effects of Soft Drink Taxes on Child and Adolescent Consumption and Weight Outcomes. † Journal of Public Economics 94 (2010): 967-974. Green, Rebecca. â€Å"The Ethics of Sin Taxes. † Public Health Nursing 28. 1 (2010): 68-77. Gruber, Jonathan. â€Å"Tobacco At the Crossroads: The Past and Future of Smoking Regulation in the United States. † Journal of Economic Perspectives 15. (2001): 193-212. Hines, James R. Jr. â€Å"Taxing Consumption and Other Sins. † Journal of Economic Perspectives 21. 1 (2007): 49-68. Johnson, Cathy M. and Kenneth J. Meier. â€Å"The Wages of Sin: Taxing America's Legal Vices. † The Western Political Quarterly 43. 3 (1990): 577-595. Lorenzi, Peter. â€Å"Sin Taxes. † Social Science and Public Policy 41. 3 (2004): 59-65. —. â€Å"Taxing Antisocial Behavior for the Common Good. † Society 47. 4 (2010): 328-332. —. â€Å"The Moral Grounds of Sin Taxes. † Society 44. 1 (2006): 67-71. Mikesell, John L. Fiscal Administration. Belmont, CA: Thompson Wadsworth, 2007. O'Donoghue, Ted and Matthew Rabin. â€Å"Optimal Sin Taxes. † Journal of Public Economics 90 (2006): 1825-1849. Poterba, James M. â€Å"Lifetime INcidence and the Diatributional Burden of Excise Taxes. † American Economic Review 79. 2 (1989): 325-330. Schmidt, Robert, Charles F. Barr and David A. Swanson. â€Å"Socioeconomic Impacts of the Proposed Federal Gaming Tax. † International Journal of Public Administration 20. 8-9 (1997): 1675-1698. Viscusi, W. Kip. â€Å"Promoting Smokers' Welfare With Responsible Taxation. † National Tax Journal 47. 3 (1994): 547-558.

Importance of Technology in Classroom Essay

Technology is either a boon or bane, depends how and for what purpose it’s being used. If technology is used to cure diseases in people, to help people communicate with each other across geographical boundaries, to reduce human effort by making things simple, easy and accessible, it indeed is a boon. However, if science and technology is used to prepare nuclear bombs or other weapons of war, it is harmful. As pros and cons of technology have always been debated, with some people arguing that its the best thing to have happened to human race and some totally against it, it is often wondered should the children, the future of mankind, be introduced to technology at a young age in schools? What is the importance of technology in classrooms? Let’s find out the answers†¦ Importance of Technology in the Classroom Active Participation When students are learning through technology, they are themselves looking for information on the Internet. They make their own decisions regarding the information i.e. whether it is relevant or irrelevant. They have control over how to use or present this information. Thus, one of the main benefits of using technology for classrooms is that unlike a teacher-led classroom, where students passively receive whatever information the teacher is providing, in tech savvy classrooms, students are active participants. In-depth Knowledge Jon Stewart once commented, â€Å"The Internet is just a world passing around notes in a classroom.† By using the Internet technology, obtaining information on all kinds of subjects has become very easy. A student sitting in his classroom can learn how people in a small village in Africa live life. Thus, Internet is a kind of library which is at the disposal of a student with just a click. A student can acquire in-depth knowledge on any subject using this vast resource. Real-life Work Experience The importance of technology in the classroom can be gauged from the fact that it offers an experience to students similar to the working environment that one sees in offices. In technology savvy classrooms, a teacher acts as a facilitator who sets project goals for the students and provides them with the necessary resources and guidelines to reach those goals. The student himself makes decisions with regards to the design choices, the information he wants to use and display, the resources that he will use. You may read more on the importance of science and technology. Moreover, these days, students themselves are very tech savvy and may sometimes even know more than the teacher himself. So, there is a constant exchange of information between the students and the teachers. Such an environment prepares a student to work in business organizations in the future. Increased Motivation Researches have shown that there is great importance of integrating technology in the classroom. When students are taught through slide shows or by showing films, it makes the lessons very easy and interesting for them. It helps in their learning, at the same time motivates them to attend school everyday. Thus, another importance of technology in schools is that it brings down the drop-out rates. Technical Skills Using computers on a daily basis, helps the students in developing an understanding of the various computer tools and softwares. This kind of education prepares the students and makes it easier for them to learn about the various software applications in future. You may read more on why is technology so important today. This very well defines the importance of computers in the classroom.

Online Learning Statistics and Research