I am not saying prices would rise in direct consequence to a reduction in regulation. The premise is that they are pricing below market right now, and probably also for a more open market. This is an expense to them designed to create the open market they want.

Once they have it, they'll have little reason to underprice anymore. You need drivers to run this kind of business (for now), and they will create an upward pressure on cost (to a point) as they move between legitimate services based on who actually pays them a living.

In the abstract, breaking up monopolies is the canonical example.

Breaking up monopolies raises prices? You've lost me :-)

I think the GP is talking about breaking up 'natural' monopolies, rather than government monopolies.

Note: Just to skip a potential semantic argument that always crops up around this: whether or not you believe it's appropriate to call it a monopoly if it's not enforced by government fiat is beside the point.

Less regulation = not breaking up a monopoly = higher prices.

s/picked/piqued/