> It's not quite as simple as that -- taxis are widely used by homeless/indigent people as sometimes their only means of transportation to get to the doctor/employment/etc.

Wait, seriously? Taxis are pretty universally expensive, so it'd really surprise me if those without gainful employment were using them. Public transportation is far less costly, even if it is less convenient most of the time, so I'd figure that'd be used more in these cases.

That's assuming you live in a place with good public transportation.

A lot of people you wouldn't expect to be able to afford a taxi have to rely on them because they can't afford a car. It's one of the defining things about poverty, you end up spending more money on things than somebody better off because you can't afford the capital outlay to make it cheaper.

There are a lot of smaller cities without public transportation. Not just frustrating public transportation like San Francisco's MUNI or even complete jokes of public transportation like Los Angeles, but literally none at all.

Forgive me if i'm wrong but aren't people being actively locked out of the taxi industry in NY due to the current regulations?

I don't see how that relates to the grandparent post. I think the parent post is saying that a world in which cabs can only called by smartphone and can no longer be hailed in person would exclude some people and you are saying that some people who want to form cab companies are being prevented from do so. I imagine for the most part these are two separate sets of people.