5 ms·

I never understood why towing isn't a function of the provincial government. The government entering the industry would reduce violence, corruption, and insuran

I never understood why towing isn't a function of the provincial government. The government entering the industry would reduce violence, corruption, and insurance costs for all. It is well known here in Toronto that tow trucks are scum of the earth. Earlier this year [0] there were 10 charged, including one police in a corruption scandal in Toronto. They were so brazen that they stole from the police! Then a month later, Toronto suspended 5 more police in the same tow truck scandal. [1] All this to say, the corruption is a well known issue in Toronto. The provincial government has repeatedly claimed to go after "gangs", yet no solution has been put forth to end what is one of the biggest gangs in the province and the punishments that are doled out are pathetically light. [0] https://www.google.com/amp/s/beta.ctvnews.ca/local/toronto/2020/6/22/1_4994654.html https://www.google.com/amp/s/beta.ctvnews.ca/local/toronto/2... [1] https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.cbc.ca/amp/1.5649083 https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.cbc.ca/amp/1.5649083 [2] https://correspondence.premier.gov.on.ca/EN/feedback/default.aspx https://correspondence.premier.gov.on.ca/EN/feedback/default... Edit: After writing this, I realized it would be more productive to write to my premier, so I did. You can too. [2]

jariel 6y ago
"The government entering the industry would reduce violence, corruption, and insurance costs for all." ??? Conversely, one would ask why on earth the government would ever get into such a thing it has clearly no business doing? You could make the same arguments about Taxis, Entertainment, Auto Manufacture, R&D, Convenience Stores - hey, let's 'socialize the entire economy' - think of how much more efficient it would be! The government doesn't really have a good track record in most of those things, so we like to regulate and have interventions where needed i.e. single point of failure. The government in Quebec and Ontario control Liquor and Beer distribution (beer in the latter) and the result is vastly overpriced goods. The liquor stores admittedly are 'really nice' but there are long line ups, and prices are out of this world. Even as wine sales are allowed in grocery stores in Quebec, the 'Gov. Liquor Monopoly' thuggishly enforced rules such that the quality of the wine out of their stores is so bad it's undrinkable. The only wine that made it out of their mafia control was what you'd get in the US for $4 a bottle, i.e. undrinkable. So no, some transparency, good laws and regulation would be appropriate, we don't need a cabal forming within the government taking over that system.
- djrogers 6y ago
  > The only wine that made it out of their mafia control was what you'd get in the US for $4 a bottle, i.e. undrinkable. Hey, I’ve drank many a bottle of 2 buck chuck. It’s not great, but it’s not exactly Night Train... Edit - reference [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flavored_fortified_wine https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flavored_fortified_wine
- Drunk_Engineer 6y ago
  A single car breaking down on a Bay Area toll bridge can bring the entire region to a stand-still. So the region's transportation authority runs a free tow service to keep bridges clear. It works very well.
  - clarkmoody 6y ago
    Alternatively, the bridge operator could offer a refund of the tolls if the transit of the bridge exceeds a contractually-guaranteed time. The profit motive would ensure adequate towing capabilities are allocated for the bridge. If towing is controlled by the political apparatus, then perhaps they don't send the tow trucks if a vehicle is blocking the bridge to make a political statement.
    - 9000 6y ago
      Sure, the bridge operator could do that, but why? Bridges don't operate as efficient markets with heavy competition, instead they tend to act as regional monopolies. If you don't cross this bridge, you usually have to drive an hour or more out of your way. This market position of the bridge operator gives them outsize leverage over their customers, and so there is no incentive for them to compete on things like price or low traffic congestion, because who are they competing with? So, I'm not sure a "profit motive" is really the solution here. Yes, the bridge operator could make that contractual offer and add towing infrastructure out of the goodness of their heart, but there's no incentive to doing so. A decent local government does have that incentive (as they are responsible to the commuters as voters), so they offer that service. You could have regulation that forces the bridge operator to provide this service instead of the government, but is that really less government intervention?
dwaltrip 6y ago
Diligently prosecuting fraud and corruption would seem to be the obvious place to start here.
Scoundreller 6y ago
Then the Toronto Police spent $35m to switch to encrypted radios, which were cloned and streamed for a fee to tow-trucks. The best was when the clone was put back in police service and the original kept by the cloners. https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/toronto/toronto-police-tow-truck-radios-1.5622069 https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/toronto/toronto-police-tow-tr...
- kojeovo 6y ago
  Wow. You're not kidding. "What this illustrates is that the tow operator had a genuine TPS radio in his possession, while our officers were using a cloned version," Sinipoli said.
djrogers 6y ago
If we start from the premise ‘we have a government corruption problem’, how does giving said government more power and responsibility fix that? It’s like saying my car is too slow, let me add 500lbs of weight.
- wongarsu 6y ago
  It removes a large part of the incentive for corruption (since no one directly receives the profits from towing), and allows for better oversight and much tighter rules.
  - optimiz3 6y ago
    Could go really wrong though - civil asset forfeiture comes to mind in parts of the US as a relevant analogue.
    - aljg 6y ago
      Civil asset forfeiture is another great example (analogous to these towing companies) of how a profit motive should not be associated with critical societal services. When there is a large incentive to steal or defraud (whether police or tow trucks) it's likely to happen. This comment just further supports that there should not be such a profit motive.
      - pas 6y ago
        It could be price controlled in case the police calls them.
- smnrchrds 6y ago
  How the tow truck industry is now, firefighting used to be before it was turned into a public service. I have a billion orders of magnitude more faith in firefighters than in tow truck companies. Why should we not do the same process to tow trucks? > Firefighting used to be a private for-profit industry. In the 1800’s, the early days of urbanization, in cities like New York and Baltimore, there were private “clubs” or “gangs” who were in charge of putting out fires. The infamous Boss Tweed started his illustrious political career at a volunteer fire company. The way it functioned was the first club at the scene got money from the insurance company. So, they had an incentive to get there fast. They also had an incentive to sabotage competition. They also often ended up getting in fights over territory and many times buildings would burn down before the issue was resolved. They were glorified looters. It was corrupt, bloated and expensive https://www.huffpost.com/entry/firefighting-in-the-1800s_b_247936 https://www.huffpost.com/entry/firefighting-in-the-1800s_b_2...
phkahler 6y ago
>> The government entering the industry would reduce violence, corruption, and insurance costs for all. But then you mention: >> Then a month later, Toronto suspended 5 more police in the same tow truck scandal. If you want to go after corruption that's fine. But it's probably not sufficient to just change an industry from private to government run.
ThePowerOfFuet 6y ago
Can you please not perpetuate the web-cancer which is AMP? Instead, please post the canonical links.

jariel 6y ago

"The government entering the industry would reduce violence, corruption, and insurance costs for all." ??? Conversely, one would ask why on earth the government would ever get into such a thing it has clearly no business doing? You could make the same arguments about Taxis, Entertainment, Auto Manufacture, R&D, Convenience Stores - hey, let's 'socialize the entire economy' - think of how much more efficient it would be! The government doesn't really have a good track record in most of those things, so we like to regulate and have interventions where needed i.e. single point of failure. The government in Quebec and Ontario control Liquor and Beer distribution (beer in the latter) and the result is vastly overpriced goods. The liquor stores admittedly are 'really nice' but there are long line ups, and prices are out of this world. Even as wine sales are allowed in grocery stores in Quebec, the 'Gov. Liquor Monopoly' thuggishly enforced rules such that the quality of the wine out of their stores is so bad it's undrinkable. The only wine that made it out of their mafia control was what you'd get in the US for $4 a bottle, i.e. undrinkable. So no, some transparency, good laws and regulation would be appropriate, we don't need a cabal forming within the government taking over that system.

djrogers 6y ago
> The only wine that made it out of their mafia control was what you'd get in the US for $4 a bottle, i.e. undrinkable. Hey, I’ve drank many a bottle of 2 buck chuck. It’s not great, but it’s not exactly Night Train... Edit - reference [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flavored_fortified_wine https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flavored_fortified_wine
Drunk_Engineer 6y ago
A single car breaking down on a Bay Area toll bridge can bring the entire region to a stand-still. So the region's transportation authority runs a free tow service to keep bridges clear. It works very well.
- clarkmoody 6y ago
  Alternatively, the bridge operator could offer a refund of the tolls if the transit of the bridge exceeds a contractually-guaranteed time. The profit motive would ensure adequate towing capabilities are allocated for the bridge. If towing is controlled by the political apparatus, then perhaps they don't send the tow trucks if a vehicle is blocking the bridge to make a political statement.
  - 9000 6y ago
    Sure, the bridge operator could do that, but why? Bridges don't operate as efficient markets with heavy competition, instead they tend to act as regional monopolies. If you don't cross this bridge, you usually have to drive an hour or more out of your way. This market position of the bridge operator gives them outsize leverage over their customers, and so there is no incentive for them to compete on things like price or low traffic congestion, because who are they competing with? So, I'm not sure a "profit motive" is really the solution here. Yes, the bridge operator could make that contractual offer and add towing infrastructure out of the goodness of their heart, but there's no incentive to doing so. A decent local government does have that incentive (as they are responsible to the commuters as voters), so they offer that service. You could have regulation that forces the bridge operator to provide this service instead of the government, but is that really less government intervention?

dwaltrip 6y ago

Diligently prosecuting fraud and corruption would seem to be the obvious place to start here.

Scoundreller 6y ago

Then the Toronto Police spent $35m to switch to encrypted radios, which were cloned and streamed for a fee to tow-trucks. The best was when the clone was put back in police service and the original kept by the cloners. https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/toronto/toronto-police-tow-truck-radios-1.5622069 https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/toronto/toronto-police-tow-tr...

kojeovo 6y ago
Wow. You're not kidding. "What this illustrates is that the tow operator had a genuine TPS radio in his possession, while our officers were using a cloned version," Sinipoli said.

djrogers 6y ago

If we start from the premise ‘we have a government corruption problem’, how does giving said government more power and responsibility fix that? It’s like saying my car is too slow, let me add 500lbs of weight.

wongarsu 6y ago
It removes a large part of the incentive for corruption (since no one directly receives the profits from towing), and allows for better oversight and much tighter rules.
- optimiz3 6y ago
  Could go really wrong though - civil asset forfeiture comes to mind in parts of the US as a relevant analogue.
  - aljg 6y ago
    Civil asset forfeiture is another great example (analogous to these towing companies) of how a profit motive should not be associated with critical societal services. When there is a large incentive to steal or defraud (whether police or tow trucks) it's likely to happen. This comment just further supports that there should not be such a profit motive.
    - pas 6y ago
      It could be price controlled in case the police calls them.
smnrchrds 6y ago
How the tow truck industry is now, firefighting used to be before it was turned into a public service. I have a billion orders of magnitude more faith in firefighters than in tow truck companies. Why should we not do the same process to tow trucks? > Firefighting used to be a private for-profit industry. In the 1800’s, the early days of urbanization, in cities like New York and Baltimore, there were private “clubs” or “gangs” who were in charge of putting out fires. The infamous Boss Tweed started his illustrious political career at a volunteer fire company. The way it functioned was the first club at the scene got money from the insurance company. So, they had an incentive to get there fast. They also had an incentive to sabotage competition. They also often ended up getting in fights over territory and many times buildings would burn down before the issue was resolved. They were glorified looters. It was corrupt, bloated and expensive https://www.huffpost.com/entry/firefighting-in-the-1800s_b_247936 https://www.huffpost.com/entry/firefighting-in-the-1800s_b_2...

phkahler 6y ago

>> The government entering the industry would reduce violence, corruption, and insurance costs for all. But then you mention: >> Then a month later, Toronto suspended 5 more police in the same tow truck scandal. If you want to go after corruption that's fine. But it's probably not sufficient to just change an industry from private to government run.

ThePowerOfFuet 6y ago

Can you please not perpetuate the web-cancer which is AMP? Instead, please post the canonical links.