4 ms·

Think about this, a business is disrupted to the point where they can't make any money at all. Yet, no customer is hurt in the process. In fact the customer is

Think about this, a business is disrupted to the point where they can't make any money at all. Yet, no customer is hurt in the process. In fact the customer is happier because now at least, he has a choice. I would break a monopolist law for that.

chx 9y ago
Of course a lot of customers are hurt in the process, actually the entire society is: by weakening the rule of law and by rolling back most advances organized labor made in the last 100+ years. You have been bamboozled by calling this the "sharing economy". All you see is a cheap ride -- sponsored by VC money and you gladly take it. Edit: thanks for the downvotes. Care to educate me where I am wrong?
- geon 9y ago
  Progress is made by breaking laws. The founders of your country committed treason against England. Strikes used to be illegal. Fredom of assembly, speech, religion and press used to be severely restricted.
  - chx 9y ago
    Those were organized moves by various people not by a company for profit. They have proven to be advantageous to society. I utterly fail to see what advantages are made here.
    - johnvonneumann 9y ago
      A company making a profit is an "organised move by various people". Advantageous to society, as you put it, is subjective, we all have different beliefs of what this entails. I am an ex-smoker, many believe banning smoking to be "advantageous to society", many believe it to be a stamp on their right to choose. Your lack of understanding/ability to see what the advantages are, is a null argument. https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/personal-incredulity https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/personal-incredulity
- imissmyfreedom 9y ago
  "Of course" is not an argument. Please explain how customers are harmed by having more choice in the marketplace. The medallion racket was certainly not an advancement for organized labor. Quite the opposite, really - it prevented common drivers from being able to make a decent living and instead transferred more money into the pockets of the established players. Rather than paying off cars and building businesses, drivers end up spending a great deal of money renting medallions (or going into debt when presented a chance to buy one, as the guy in the article did). Even if you buy the idea that this was to "protect" drivers, would you accept that same logic in your own industry? What if you built a new CRM (sorry, I don't know what you build, if anything) that was better than any other CRM... but you aren't allowed to sell it because the government quota for CRMs is already full... but if you enter you name in an annual lottery, you might get a very small chance to buy a CRM Medallion someday at a reasonable price... or you could buy an existing medallion from another company for $233k and bring you CRM to market now. Does that sound reasonable to you?
- mschuster91 9y ago
  > Edit: thanks for the downvotes. Care to educate me where I am wrong? I have upvoted you, because I fully agree with you. Breaking laws is, in my opinion, acceptable in some situations... for example, to protest against injustice (as it was the case with strikes, right to free speech/assembly, and racial segregation) or standing up against neo-Nazis and police brutality. But it is not acceptable at all to break any law for business profit. If you want to make more money and a law hinders you doing so, then go through the democratic channels. Of course, this does not account for politics being effectively gridlocked, but hey, given you're a multi-billion-dollar corporation, it's definitely easy to hire some top notch lawyers and lobbyists.
  - chx 9y ago
    > If you want to make more money and a law hinders you doing so, then go through the democratic channels. Exactly!

chx 9y ago

Of course a lot of customers are hurt in the process, actually the entire society is: by weakening the rule of law and by rolling back most advances organized labor made in the last 100+ years. You have been bamboozled by calling this the "sharing economy". All you see is a cheap ride -- sponsored by VC money and you gladly take it. Edit: thanks for the downvotes. Care to educate me where I am wrong?

geon 9y ago
Progress is made by breaking laws. The founders of your country committed treason against England. Strikes used to be illegal. Fredom of assembly, speech, religion and press used to be severely restricted.
- chx 9y ago
  Those were organized moves by various people not by a company for profit. They have proven to be advantageous to society. I utterly fail to see what advantages are made here.
  - johnvonneumann 9y ago
    A company making a profit is an "organised move by various people". Advantageous to society, as you put it, is subjective, we all have different beliefs of what this entails. I am an ex-smoker, many believe banning smoking to be "advantageous to society", many believe it to be a stamp on their right to choose. Your lack of understanding/ability to see what the advantages are, is a null argument. https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/personal-incredulity https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/personal-incredulity
imissmyfreedom 9y ago
"Of course" is not an argument. Please explain how customers are harmed by having more choice in the marketplace. The medallion racket was certainly not an advancement for organized labor. Quite the opposite, really - it prevented common drivers from being able to make a decent living and instead transferred more money into the pockets of the established players. Rather than paying off cars and building businesses, drivers end up spending a great deal of money renting medallions (or going into debt when presented a chance to buy one, as the guy in the article did). Even if you buy the idea that this was to "protect" drivers, would you accept that same logic in your own industry? What if you built a new CRM (sorry, I don't know what you build, if anything) that was better than any other CRM... but you aren't allowed to sell it because the government quota for CRMs is already full... but if you enter you name in an annual lottery, you might get a very small chance to buy a CRM Medallion someday at a reasonable price... or you could buy an existing medallion from another company for $233k and bring you CRM to market now. Does that sound reasonable to you?
mschuster91 9y ago
> Edit: thanks for the downvotes. Care to educate me where I am wrong? I have upvoted you, because I fully agree with you. Breaking laws is, in my opinion, acceptable in some situations... for example, to protest against injustice (as it was the case with strikes, right to free speech/assembly, and racial segregation) or standing up against neo-Nazis and police brutality. But it is not acceptable at all to break any law for business profit. If you want to make more money and a law hinders you doing so, then go through the democratic channels. Of course, this does not account for politics being effectively gridlocked, but hey, given you're a multi-billion-dollar corporation, it's definitely easy to hire some top notch lawyers and lobbyists.
- chx 9y ago
  > If you want to make more money and a law hinders you doing so, then go through the democratic channels. Exactly!