Re:Massachusetts to tax ride-hailing apps, give the money to...
by rhino369 on Sunday August 21, 2016 @02:08AM
(#12329646)
That's not how taxi medallions came into existence. Cities began to regulate taxis. They set prices, made safety regulations, made it so taxis couldn't refuse service.
In exchange taxis were licensed to ensure the prices the city set supported a fleet of taxis.
It's hilarious that Uber a billion dollar corporation portrays a bunch of Muslim or African immigrants as rich fat cats. Just lol
Re:Massachusetts to tax ride-hailing apps, give the money to...
by emodendroket on Sunday August 21, 2016 @08:13AM
(#12330637)
What can you say? They've got good PR folks and well-connected political hires.
Re:Massachusetts to tax ride-hailing apps, give the money to...
by rayiner on Sunday August 21, 2016 @10:07AM
(#12330961)
What's particularly fantastic is that they can maintain this PR shtick in the face of the fact that the thing that makes uber possible--surge pricing--is exactly the kind of "gouging" government-regulated rates we're designed to prevent. "Oh, it's raining? Well that's going to cost extra!"
Re:Massachusetts to tax ride-hailing apps, give the money to...
by emodendroket on Monday August 22, 2016 @10:06AM
(#12336396)
I mean, it's gotta help to have guys like David Plouffe on the payroll, right?
- an industry wants to operate as cartel,
- but it can't police defectors charging market prices,
- so it gets the government to enforce the cartel,
- and calls this "regulation" even though it gouges, rather than protects the public.
And somehow it is unfair if this gets undermined by events?
To take your mall-and-hawkers example, what exactly is wrong with that situation? In practice it doesn't happen very often because no one is going to give the hawkers space for free.
But if the mall rents were high because the builder bribed the council to keep competition far away, well that's their own fault.