Whenever this comes up, I really don't care if there is antitrust or not. Delivery is a luxury service.

Whenever I bring this up, someone always goes "so disabled people should starve"? What did they do before delivery apps? Many restaurants still offer delivery that they do themselves (seriously, look it up). But more importantly, meals on wheels and other services are still a very large, established network.

Anyways, I guess I could be convinced that this is bad for restaurants. But so many restaurants, especially in cities, are offering delivery services where 10 and 20 years ago there were none. And the infrastructure is not set up to handle that.

As a result, city streets are frequently blocked by delivery drivers. I genuinely would love if my city passed a resolution that prevented restaurants within the city center from offering DoorDash/Ubereats unless they had a dedicated parking lot.

▲

asdf88990 4 hours ago | parent | next [-]

Delivery is a luxury service until:

- you have school kids and a full time

- a medical condition

- work 2 jobs because economy is fucked.

- can’t drive of old age.

And a million other reasons. In old times with a working community, delivery was a luxury, in “modern” days, it is often a necessity for lack of alternatives.

When was the last time you offered the old people down the road if they need help?

▲

halamadrid 2 hours ago | parent | next [-]

On demand delivery where you pay a premium of 30-40% over the actual cost (sometimes even more) is definitely a luxury to me. I can probably afford to do this but I still do pick ups along with my other errands. Only is rare circumstances I get one off deliveries and it hurts me to see the cost each time I look at it!

Doing it regularly is probably wasting money especially in this economy.

Kids + full time - pick up the food on your way home? Medical condition - arrange for a routine cost effective delivery (like those meal delivery services who tend to deliver on their routes for free even?) work 2 jobs - pick up along the way somewhere can't drive? - use that routine delivery or find a way to cook or use a weekly meal delivery service etc.

But buying one off every other day paying the premium seems definitely a luxury. YMMV.

▲

goosejuice 3 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

There are more social services for people that need this than there were in the 70s and volunteering appears roughly flat since then.

Meanwhile, people have been getting old, having kids, two jobs, medical conditions and so on for a little while now. A tremendous amount of America isn't even in a food delivery area unless you count McDonald's.

Eating out is a luxury. Getting that food delivered even more so. This isn't about basic needs.

▲

johnnyanmac 3 hours ago | parent [-]

>volunteering appears roughly flat since then.

>people have been getting old, having kids, two jobs, medical conditions and so on for a little while now.

well you explained the phenomenon pretty concisely.

▲

goosejuice 3 hours ago | parent [-]

Indeed, in the good ol days people were worse off. But I suppose you forgot to quote that part.

	▲	komali2 4 minutes ago \| parent \| next [-]
		Having nicer products or the overall state of technology being greater now than before doesn't mean people are automatically overall better off. Yes we can cure more cancers now. Yes we have less lynchings now, by the public or police. But people are, objectively, less financially secure. Cost of home ownership being 5x median income now vs 3.2x in the 90s, trending higher decade on decade, is a decent enough single number to point to. The long and short of it is that these benefits are being concentrated, as anything regarding wealth inevitably is, in the hands of a few. https://www.jchs.harvard.edu/sites/default/files/reports/fil...
	▲	johnnyanmac 2 hours ago \| parent \| prev [-]
		You forgot to mention it so I could quote it. Nonetheless, I don't see the productivity in arguing over generational lifestyle here. I just wanted to highlight that making people work more than ever means less people volunteer. Whether that is a good thing or not is up to the reader.

▲

tptacek an hour ago | parent | prev | next [-]

All these conditions were common (some of them nearly universal) before Instacart ever existed.

At least with Uber, you could point to the regulated taxi system that was being displaced. That logic doesn't work at all for Instacart.

▲

gregglain 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

And luxuries have a cost. I won't pay it until I'll have to choose to.

▲

DANmode 28 minutes ago | parent | prev [-]

Are we talking about the $3 delivery charge from the Chinese joint around the corner,

or the effective $13-$33 charge per order from the major delivery apps, after up charge to be using it plus delivery?

Let’s make sure we’re talking about the same stuff, here.

▲

selcuka an hour ago | parent | prev | next [-]

> As a result, city streets are frequently blocked by delivery drivers.

How is it different than customers driving to the restaurant? Are you suggesting that there should be less restaurants, or people should use public transport to pick up food?

▲

bobbylarrybobby 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Delivery is a luxury for diners but not restaurants, who now have one fewer vendor.

▲

wry_xy 3 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Occasionally for fun I'll check the price of DoorDash / Uber Eats for fast food and compare it with the normal menu prices. The difference is insane. I don't think I'd pay that even if I were a billionaire. It's absolutely a luxury and I can't believe normal people pay for it.

▲

5 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

[deleted]

▲

johnnyanmac 3 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

Entertainment is also a luxury service. I don't think that justifies the behemoth mergers/acquisitions we've seen this decade. It's about competition, not necessarily how important the service is to the people.