The price vs. users graph[0] is hopelessly wrong, dangerously wrong even. So wrong I can't take anything the author says about economics or markets seriously a

The price vs. users graph[0] is hopelessly wrong, dangerously wrong even. So wrong I can't take anything the author says about economics or markets seriously at all. I think they're trying to make the argument that Uber will achieve economies of scale but that would be cost vs. users, not price. Price and cost are different things. The graph also implicitly makes the assumption that there are an infinite number of users and Uber has competitors. In reality as the number of users increases Uber looks more and more like a monopoly and the price approaches whatever maximizes Uber's profits as opposed to "free". The bigger Uber gets the more they become the government they're fighting against. In a healthy free market price will approach marginal cost, but Uber isn't fighting for a healthy free market. It's the last thing they want. > While zero car ownership will undoubtedly and unremittingly be a net social good—can’t wait until driving is something one does for fun, ban cars! Can't tell if the author is for or against regulation. [0] - http://cdn.theawl.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/08/price.jpg http://cdn.theawl.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/08/price.jpg