4 ms·

No, it's really not. First off, it's not unique: there's a bunch of places where they're outright banned or prevented from operating, such as Austin. Second,

No, it's really not. First off, it's not unique: there's a bunch of places where they're outright banned or prevented from operating, such as Austin. Second, forcing them to price rides at $75 a ride is just a tactic to drive them out of business altogether, without the government doing anything to actually make the situation better for its citizens. What enlightened local governments would do is figure out how to enact some sensible regulations on these new Uber-like services, and then let them set their own prices and compete fairly. Sensible regulations would have to do with employee treatment, such as the whole controversy about employees being "contractors" (which is a hard problem: many of them like working part-time, and even work for multiple services simultaneously, taking calls from one service or the other), and the controversy about how to deal with the auto insurance (this one's easier: they could simply require Uber to self-insure while a driver is on a call, but there's still an issue about when drivers are between calls). But I don't see any attempts by cities to do anything like this; they only want to prop up the existing taxi cartels, and do a terrible job with public transit.

serge2k 10y ago
> No, it's really not Yes, it really is. > forcing them to price rides at $75 a ride is just a tactic to drive them out of business altogether, without the government doing anything to actually make the situation better for its citizens They were classified as limos. I said I disagree with that. It's not some great conspiracy to target Uber, it's an application of the law. Would you rather they get lumped in with Taxi's and forced to follow all those regs? > What enlightened local governments would do is figure out how to enact some sensible regulations on these new Uber-like services, and then let them set their own prices and compete fairly. I agree. I support any efforts to bring in law changes to let Uber operate. I don't support letting them just jump into the market and do what they want.
- Grishnakh 10y ago
  >They were classified as limos. I said I disagree with that. It's not some great conspiracy to target Uber, it's an application of the law. Would you rather they get lumped in with Taxi's and forced to follow all those regs? No, I'd rather the local governments get their heads out of their asses and enact some sensible regulation instead of trying to kill the golden goose that's finally giving people a service that actually works well and that they like to use, unlike the taxis, and at a price that's affordable, unlike limos. Uber is a great thing, but it's in uncharted territory regulation-wise and does need some regulation to make sure that employees (yes, that's what they are when they work for you) are treated fairly, that issues about insurance are known and consistent, etc. I don't see anyone attempting to do this at all. >I don't support letting them just jump into the market and do what they want. What's your alternative? The problem is that governments actively refuse to govern properly, and instead work to protect incumbents. If Uber waited around for good regulations to be enacted, they'd be waiting decades, if it got done at all (in reality, it wouldn't). The only way to force governments to act is to do what they've done. As the old saying goes, "it's better to beg forgiveness than to ask permission". There's a reason this saying came about: if you ask permission, most likely you'll be told "no", because people (especially organizations, and most especially governments) hate change. If you go and do it anyway, then the other parties just have to deal with it and are forced to work with you.
  - serge2k 10y ago
    > What's your alternative? Pressure governing bodies to bring in regulation to allow you to operate legally. Uber isn't some small business fighting against an unfair market. It's a multi-billion dollar multinational corporation that deliberately flouts regulation to attempt to gain a foothold and then strongarm their way to a favorable outcome under threat of pulling service and pissing off voters.
    - Grishnakh 10y ago
      Uber only became a multi-billion dollar multinational corporation by deliberately flouting regulation. They never would have gotten that way if they had followed all the existing taxi regulations instead of lawyering up and fighting it. Disruptive companies never succeed by playing by the rules the incumbents set. I'm really curious how you think a company would amass billions of dollars without actually being in business first, providing a service, having customers, and gaining revenue. Companies don't just start out as multi-billion dollar multinational corporations.

serge2k 10y ago

> No, it's really not Yes, it really is. > forcing them to price rides at $75 a ride is just a tactic to drive them out of business altogether, without the government doing anything to actually make the situation better for its citizens They were classified as limos. I said I disagree with that. It's not some great conspiracy to target Uber, it's an application of the law. Would you rather they get lumped in with Taxi's and forced to follow all those regs? > What enlightened local governments would do is figure out how to enact some sensible regulations on these new Uber-like services, and then let them set their own prices and compete fairly. I agree. I support any efforts to bring in law changes to let Uber operate. I don't support letting them just jump into the market and do what they want.

Grishnakh 10y ago
>They were classified as limos. I said I disagree with that. It's not some great conspiracy to target Uber, it's an application of the law. Would you rather they get lumped in with Taxi's and forced to follow all those regs? No, I'd rather the local governments get their heads out of their asses and enact some sensible regulation instead of trying to kill the golden goose that's finally giving people a service that actually works well and that they like to use, unlike the taxis, and at a price that's affordable, unlike limos. Uber is a great thing, but it's in uncharted territory regulation-wise and does need some regulation to make sure that employees (yes, that's what they are when they work for you) are treated fairly, that issues about insurance are known and consistent, etc. I don't see anyone attempting to do this at all. >I don't support letting them just jump into the market and do what they want. What's your alternative? The problem is that governments actively refuse to govern properly, and instead work to protect incumbents. If Uber waited around for good regulations to be enacted, they'd be waiting decades, if it got done at all (in reality, it wouldn't). The only way to force governments to act is to do what they've done. As the old saying goes, "it's better to beg forgiveness than to ask permission". There's a reason this saying came about: if you ask permission, most likely you'll be told "no", because people (especially organizations, and most especially governments) hate change. If you go and do it anyway, then the other parties just have to deal with it and are forced to work with you.
- serge2k 10y ago
  > What's your alternative? Pressure governing bodies to bring in regulation to allow you to operate legally. Uber isn't some small business fighting against an unfair market. It's a multi-billion dollar multinational corporation that deliberately flouts regulation to attempt to gain a foothold and then strongarm their way to a favorable outcome under threat of pulling service and pissing off voters.
  - Grishnakh 10y ago
    Uber only became a multi-billion dollar multinational corporation by deliberately flouting regulation. They never would have gotten that way if they had followed all the existing taxi regulations instead of lawyering up and fighting it. Disruptive companies never succeed by playing by the rules the incumbents set. I'm really curious how you think a company would amass billions of dollars without actually being in business first, providing a service, having customers, and gaining revenue. Companies don't just start out as multi-billion dollar multinational corporations.