5 ms·

This is fascinating -- as revenues for municipally-backed/traditional taxi companies fall, we are starting to see municipalities raise fees on the taxi unions t

by ihsw 11y ago

This is fascinating -- as revenues for municipally-backed/traditional taxi companies fall, we are starting to see municipalities raise fees on the taxi unions to make up the shortfall. Oftentimes these taxi unions wield striking as leverage in negotiations, a tactic which is rapidly losing effectiveness and is generally counter-productive. So the judiciary doesn't care for legal challenges against Uber, municipalities are actively working against taxi unions, and consumers are flocking to Uber in droves -- what is a unionized taxi driver to do in this kind of political and economic climate?

throwaway1967 11y ago
> what is a unionized taxi driver to do in this kind of political and economic climate? Do the moral thing and step-down from their monopolies, and embrace competition. Why do you care about immoral people? Those who benefit from monopolies are not above robbers who benefit from a temporary monopoly on violence to bilk their victims. EDIT: response to ishw (since my posts are being delayed): The drivers that took credit in order to benefit from an immoral monopoly subsidized by tax-payers had it coming. Public libraries are available and anyone can learn where this road leads by picking up Economics in One Lesson which is eminently readable and widely available. This is like saying "this gang of robbers paid the government X dollars backed by credit for the right to rob, and we can't put those robbers in a position of defaulting on their now-worthless license to rob". Uhm, yes we can, because the "medallion" they bought is precisely the instrument that makes it illegal for everyone else to compete with them. In other words, a criminal is not exempt from their crime just because they purchased the instrument, that enabled them to commit the crime, with credit. When you say "Taking the moral highroad is not an option here", therefore, that's just a misinformed reaction to a situation that, as you correctly noted, allows for no way out that isn't harmful to one or both parties. Which is why this sort of engagement (monopolistic or monopsonistic) is to be discouraged and why only voluntary contracts should be enforced by Law. EDIT: response to mbreese: Wow... your response is a complete non-sequitur to what I said.
- ihsw 11y ago
  The article mentions most medallions are backed by credit -- that would mean the drivers would be put in a position of defaulting on their now-worthless medallions. Such investments would destroy their financial prospects for the near future if not in the long term due to the exorbitant cost associated with holding medallions. Taking the moral highroad is not an option here. It's easy to advocate the free market from afar, but not everybody is prepared to even begin participating in the free market due to being financially shackled. I was going to suggest that Uber operate a program of financial assistance to taxi drivers looking to flee the credit-subsidized catastrophe bearing down on them in exchange for multi-year employment contracts, but the collective value of these medallions is estimated at $10 Billion. Yes, ten billion USD. How would such a program work? Could it work?
  - aikah 11y ago
    > The article mentions most medallions are backed by credit -- that would mean the drivers would be put in a position of defaulting on their now-worthless medallions. A medallion buy-back is the only fair solution (for individuals, not for taxi companies). So there should be some kind of compensation so we can all get out of that system, system the local legislator created. But it shouldn't be up to Uber to pay, no matter how I dislike Uber, they didn't create the problem. The whole "free but paid because of scarcity" medallion fiasco is the real cost of corruption, and tax payers always foot the bill sooner or later in these case.
  - bcoates 11y ago
    The drivers don't generally personally own the medallions. The medallions are owned by companies who mortgage them to banks. The medallion collapse means these companies almost certainly have negative value, and if the owner isn't making enough money from it they'll just walk away. The bank will then have to legally recognize what is already obvious (that the loan on the medallion will not be paid as agreed, and the collateral is worthless). The bank may have to call in insurance and some bank customers may take some losses. $10 billion isn't going to break the bank insurance industry. What about the drivers? They've already been fired, that's why the cabs are sitting idle. There's no need to help the financial speculators.
creeble 11y ago
"what is a unionized taxi driver to do in this kind of political and economic climate?" Start driving for Uber? And try and organize a union there?
- serge2k 11y ago
  oh but you are a contractor then.

by ihsw 11y ago

throwaway1967 11y ago

> what is a unionized taxi driver to do in this kind of political and economic climate? Do the moral thing and step-down from their monopolies, and embrace competition. Why do you care about immoral people? Those who benefit from monopolies are not above robbers who benefit from a temporary monopoly on violence to bilk their victims. EDIT: response to ishw (since my posts are being delayed): The drivers that took credit in order to benefit from an immoral monopoly subsidized by tax-payers had it coming. Public libraries are available and anyone can learn where this road leads by picking up Economics in One Lesson which is eminently readable and widely available. This is like saying "this gang of robbers paid the government X dollars backed by credit for the right to rob, and we can't put those robbers in a position of defaulting on their now-worthless license to rob". Uhm, yes we can, because the "medallion" they bought is precisely the instrument that makes it illegal for everyone else to compete with them. In other words, a criminal is not exempt from their crime just because they purchased the instrument, that enabled them to commit the crime, with credit. When you say "Taking the moral highroad is not an option here", therefore, that's just a misinformed reaction to a situation that, as you correctly noted, allows for no way out that isn't harmful to one or both parties. Which is why this sort of engagement (monopolistic or monopsonistic) is to be discouraged and why only voluntary contracts should be enforced by Law. EDIT: response to mbreese: Wow... your response is a complete non-sequitur to what I said.

ihsw 11y ago
The article mentions most medallions are backed by credit -- that would mean the drivers would be put in a position of defaulting on their now-worthless medallions. Such investments would destroy their financial prospects for the near future if not in the long term due to the exorbitant cost associated with holding medallions. Taking the moral highroad is not an option here. It's easy to advocate the free market from afar, but not everybody is prepared to even begin participating in the free market due to being financially shackled. I was going to suggest that Uber operate a program of financial assistance to taxi drivers looking to flee the credit-subsidized catastrophe bearing down on them in exchange for multi-year employment contracts, but the collective value of these medallions is estimated at $10 Billion. Yes, ten billion USD. How would such a program work? Could it work?
- aikah 11y ago
  > The article mentions most medallions are backed by credit -- that would mean the drivers would be put in a position of defaulting on their now-worthless medallions. A medallion buy-back is the only fair solution (for individuals, not for taxi companies). So there should be some kind of compensation so we can all get out of that system, system the local legislator created. But it shouldn't be up to Uber to pay, no matter how I dislike Uber, they didn't create the problem. The whole "free but paid because of scarcity" medallion fiasco is the real cost of corruption, and tax payers always foot the bill sooner or later in these case.
- bcoates 11y ago
  The drivers don't generally personally own the medallions. The medallions are owned by companies who mortgage them to banks. The medallion collapse means these companies almost certainly have negative value, and if the owner isn't making enough money from it they'll just walk away. The bank will then have to legally recognize what is already obvious (that the loan on the medallion will not be paid as agreed, and the collateral is worthless). The bank may have to call in insurance and some bank customers may take some losses. $10 billion isn't going to break the bank insurance industry. What about the drivers? They've already been fired, that's why the cabs are sitting idle. There's no need to help the financial speculators.

creeble 11y ago

"what is a unionized taxi driver to do in this kind of political and economic climate?" Start driving for Uber? And try and organize a union there?

serge2k 11y ago
oh but you are a contractor then.