3 ms·

I found the best quote from the article to be the last: > “Horses in Central Park are regulated,” he pointed out. “There’s 150 of them. They make a great livin

I found the best quote from the article to be the last: > “Horses in Central Park are regulated,” he pointed out. “There’s 150 of them. They make a great living there, the guys on the horse and buggies. Say Uber comes in and says, ‘We want to bring in Uber horses. And we want to add 100,000.’ And let’s see how the market will handle it. We know what’s going to happen. No one will make money. They’re all around Central Park. And now no one can go anywhere because there are now 100,000 horses in Central Park. It would be considered madness to do that. They wouldn’t do it. Yet when it comes to the yellow cab industry, for 50 years all we could have was 13,000 cabs, and then within a year or two we’re going to add 100,000. Let’s see how the market works on that! We know how the market works.”

tootie 9y ago
Uber isn't the villain. The TLC regulated yellow cabs into oblivion. $1M for a medallion should have been a warning that they are issuing too few.
reading-at-work 9y ago
I'm genuinely curious, have you taken a cab lately? Can you honestly say you prefer that experience to what Uber or Lyft provides? I understand what that quote is saying, but I feel it's a false equivalency. There are already cars on the road in NYC. It's not like adding 10,000 horses to Central Park. Overall, the regulations on the taxi industry are the reason Uber and Lyft have been so successful - because they skirted the regulations, they were able to provide a much better user experience. We need to take a look at which regulations are actually helpful and which are expensive and unnecessary.
- zackkatz 9y ago
  I disagree with many of the points made by the article. I just found that last quote to be the one that best summed-up the problem the cabbies find themselves in. I’m a believer in mobility: if life isn’t working in NYC, then perhaps move to another place with fewer drivers and a lower cost of living. Just because you like a place and have roots there doesn’t mean life should be affordable and lovely. Much of human history is the story of leaving one place for another, in search of better living conditions. It seems that they—like publishers were!—are mentally stuck in an old paradigm. Transportation has changed; adapt or move on.
- wmeredith 9y ago
  The fact that you prefer one experience over another doesn't make it profitable, sustainable, preferable, safe, etc... I myself prefer Uber to cabs, but I'm under no illusions that without VC money subsidizing my experience there would be no Uber rides for me to prefer.
  - reading-at-work 9y ago
    Even if cabs and Uber rides were the same price, I'd still prefer Uber. Wouldn't you? That said, I doubt the VC money will dry up. Companies can operate in the red, sustained by VC money, for a long time before becoming profitable. Look at Netflix, for example. Or Amazon until recently.
- Cthulhu_ 9y ago
  It / this article / this issue really isn't about the consumer; they'll pick whichever option is cheapest. It's about sustainable employment. Are you comfortable paying, I dunno, $5 for a ride that would normally cost $15, knowing your driver has been working for 16 hours and still hasn't earned enough today to pay rent or pay for fuel? One could make the argument / defense that the driver chose to, nobody made him, and that he has nothing else though. In which case anything is better than nothing. Both are IMO regulatory problems, which a government should do something about.
  - reading-at-work 9y ago
    "knowing your driver has been working for 16 hours and still hasn't earned enough today to pay rent or pay for fuel?" See, that's the part I take issue with. That's pure assumption. Lots of my drivers have been college students working part-time for some extra cash on the side, not full-time workers trying to support themselves. I usually tip my drivers too since I know the base price isn't much. That said, I know it's not a perfect system and it has its own problems. Still, I do view it as a voluntary arrangement, and often driving is a better option for people than working at a fast food joint or a similar minimum-wage job. What type of regulations on Uber and Lyft would you propose?

tootie 9y ago

Uber isn't the villain. The TLC regulated yellow cabs into oblivion. $1M for a medallion should have been a warning that they are issuing too few.

reading-at-work 9y ago

I'm genuinely curious, have you taken a cab lately? Can you honestly say you prefer that experience to what Uber or Lyft provides? I understand what that quote is saying, but I feel it's a false equivalency. There are already cars on the road in NYC. It's not like adding 10,000 horses to Central Park. Overall, the regulations on the taxi industry are the reason Uber and Lyft have been so successful - because they skirted the regulations, they were able to provide a much better user experience. We need to take a look at which regulations are actually helpful and which are expensive and unnecessary.

zackkatz 9y ago
I disagree with many of the points made by the article. I just found that last quote to be the one that best summed-up the problem the cabbies find themselves in. I’m a believer in mobility: if life isn’t working in NYC, then perhaps move to another place with fewer drivers and a lower cost of living. Just because you like a place and have roots there doesn’t mean life should be affordable and lovely. Much of human history is the story of leaving one place for another, in search of better living conditions. It seems that they—like publishers were!—are mentally stuck in an old paradigm. Transportation has changed; adapt or move on.
wmeredith 9y ago
The fact that you prefer one experience over another doesn't make it profitable, sustainable, preferable, safe, etc... I myself prefer Uber to cabs, but I'm under no illusions that without VC money subsidizing my experience there would be no Uber rides for me to prefer.
- reading-at-work 9y ago
  Even if cabs and Uber rides were the same price, I'd still prefer Uber. Wouldn't you? That said, I doubt the VC money will dry up. Companies can operate in the red, sustained by VC money, for a long time before becoming profitable. Look at Netflix, for example. Or Amazon until recently.
Cthulhu_ 9y ago
It / this article / this issue really isn't about the consumer; they'll pick whichever option is cheapest. It's about sustainable employment. Are you comfortable paying, I dunno, $5 for a ride that would normally cost $15, knowing your driver has been working for 16 hours and still hasn't earned enough today to pay rent or pay for fuel? One could make the argument / defense that the driver chose to, nobody made him, and that he has nothing else though. In which case anything is better than nothing. Both are IMO regulatory problems, which a government should do something about.
- reading-at-work 9y ago
  "knowing your driver has been working for 16 hours and still hasn't earned enough today to pay rent or pay for fuel?" See, that's the part I take issue with. That's pure assumption. Lots of my drivers have been college students working part-time for some extra cash on the side, not full-time workers trying to support themselves. I usually tip my drivers too since I know the base price isn't much. That said, I know it's not a perfect system and it has its own problems. Still, I do view it as a voluntary arrangement, and often driving is a better option for people than working at a fast food joint or a similar minimum-wage job. What type of regulations on Uber and Lyft would you propose?