These kinds of markets have some interesting dynamics - carbon credits have similar issues. Basically, the government can set the initial price (because they artificially create the entire supply) but then the market takes over. It's very difficult for the government to set the initial price correctly (i.e., close to the eventual market price)
I seriously doubt that there's an easy mechanism for cabbies to get the city to pay the pre-uber market price for their medallions. They would probably have to sue, claiming that the medallion gave them a guaranteed monopoly that the government failed to uphold. That will turn on exactly what rights the medallion is supposed to entail.
The fact that medallions, which originally cost far less than $300,000, shot up to that price is solely because of the money they allowed you to grift from chicagos citizens. Now you think those citizens should be punished again to pay more taxes in order to redeem the speculators medallions at their highest historical price?
My guess is that if medallions changed hands at $300K, that meant that they could be leased out to cabbies for over $30K a year. That's the monopoly profits the system created for them.
We never should have bailed out the banks without much harsher terms. But politicians were worried about financial collapse. There is no worry about that here, this is objectively good for the economy and the country.
That's the thing though, they don't. And why would they? These cabbies made a bet that the medallion would not lose value until they sold it, and they lost that bet. How is this different from any other small-time business going bankrupt?
The analogy holds: A city government had a system where a good had artificial scarcity and intrinsic value from stable government policy. Then, it suddenly changed. I'm all for ride-hailing changing our public transit dynamic, but I can't fault the players of the old system too much for saying "What the hell about my retirement, my end of life?"
The fact that medallions, which originally cost far less than $300,000, shot up to that price is solely because of the money they allowed you to grift from chicagos citizens. Now you think those citizens should be punished again to pay more taxes in order to redeem the speculators medallions at their highest historical price?
My guess is that if medallions changed hands at $300K, that meant that they could be leased out to cabbies for over $30K a year. That's the monopoly profits the system created for them.
We never should have bailed out the banks without much harsher terms. But politicians were worried about financial collapse. There is no worry about that here, this is objectively good for the economy and the country.
(Does Chicago buy back the medallions, or do you have to have to sell them to someone else? Is the 300,000 the market value he paid to someone else, or is that what the city charges?)
The US government bailed out the banks in 2008, and all those people at the top got to keep their millions while so many people lost their homes (mostly due to fraud). These people watched their industry change while being locked into a sinking ship .. unable to do anything about it. These people need a bailout.