5 ms·

'Rule of law' generally refers more to how laws are written and interpreted in general, rather than whether they are enforced in one specific instance.[1] I wou

• oh_sigh 10y ago
  It's hard to tell from the auto-translation of Norwegian, but weren't these drivers not paying taxes and not licensed to be a taxi?
  • nickff 10y ago
    It seems that they are not paying 'licensing' fees/taxes, though I (much like you) am not sure because of the translation. I generally believe that most licenses that raise revenue for the government violate the rule of law, especially when they are issued on a political or non-safety related bases.
    • duskwuff 10y ago
      I'm not sure what you believe the phrase "rule of law" means, but it seems to be something other than its common definition.
      • nickff 10y ago
        My definition of rule of law is a common one where: 1) Laws must be known by all who are governed by them (i.e. there cannot be secret laws) 2) The enforcement of laws must be foreseeable and predictable (i.e. laws should not be interpreted or enforced differently over time) 3) Laws should be enforced equally against all those subject to the law (i.e. there should be no exemptions) I would argue that 'sharing economy' companies have been subjected to abrogations of 2 and 3 in many jurisdictions, and I fail to see how this specific enforcement action proves that any of these principles are being upheld. I appear to be in the minority, and a great number of people seem to believe that I am factually incorrect.
• simonh 10y ago
  The rule of law is entirely about whether and how laws are enforced. If laws are only enforced at the whim of officials or the personal preference of judges, or can be re-interpreted arbitrarily then the laws does not rule, those individuals rule. In order to have a rule of law you need laws that are for the most part applied evenly and fairly to all. In San Francisco when Uber started the law said that only licensed taxis could pock up passengers that hailed them on the street. Uber cars didn't do that, so they were legal. I've no problem with that. Good for them! In Norway it's apparently illegal for unlicensed drivers without specific insurance to carry passengers in return for money. I don't see how anybody can argue that these drivers didn't break the law.
  • nickff 10y ago
    I am not sure what your experiences are with respect to taxi and hotel licenses, but my understanding is that they are generally granted in limited numbers to politically powerful entities in exchange for campaign contributions and a tax on the oligopoly rents. Taxi licenses would comply with the rule of law iff they were freely available to anyone who met the safety and service criteria. edit: Parent has been edited significantly since I posted my reply, but I will not change mine.
    • msbarnett 10y ago
      > Taxi licenses would comply with the rule of law iff they were freely available to anyone who met the safety and service criteria. You seem to be mistaking "the rule of law" for what are simply your ideological preferences.
      • nickff 10y ago
        No, from Wikipedia: >"The Oxford English Dictionary has defined "rule of law" this way:[2] The authority and influence of law in society, esp. when viewed as a constraint on individual and institutional behaviour; (hence) the principle whereby all members of a society (including those in government) are considered equally subject to publicly disclosed legal codes and processes."