3 ms·

Cab drivers had goals to own a medallion. That medallion value rose allowing someone to retire. What we have is slightly higher pay until your car breaks. No

by ipaddr 5y ago

Cab drivers had goals to own a medallion. That medallion value rose allowing someone to retire. What we have is slightly higher pay until your car breaks. No retirement plan. The drivers lose out. The customer rides in someone's personal car pays a little less sometimes but a lot more (demand pricing) when they really need it. Uber/Lift lose money on each ride but will rise prices as soon as they can once you have fewer choices. Zero sum indeed..

nybble41 5y ago
Basing your retirement plan around the continuing artificial scarcity of taxi medallions is not smart. The city has no obligation to keep the medallions scarce; their value can drop to zero overnight due to changing regulations (or a drop in demand for taxi services, e.g. because a better public transportation system was implemented) and they won't owe you a dime. You'd be far better off working with Uber instead and putting the money you saved by not needing to buy a medallion into a diversified retirement portfolio.
- TeMPOraL 5y ago
  Medallions don't come out of thin air. It's the cities that provide them. The cities want this, because taxis are meant to be a component of the city transportation system. They're not there to compete with public transit, they're there to augment it - to service the needs that a bus or a train can't. A medallion comes with a requirement to fulfill those needs, as the city sees fit. The relationship between public mass transit, and private taxis (and private mass transit) was cooperative. The relationship between city transportation systems and Uber is hostile.
  - nybble41 5y ago
    The cities don't provide medallions, they mandate them and limit the supply. The default state without the city's intervention (i.e. no medallions needed to operate a taxi) is equivalent to having a superabundance of medallions. As you say, they do this in order to bring taxis in line with their plans for city-wide public transportation. Which is not to say that they wouldn't discard the medallion system the moment something better came along to fulfill a similar role. The city has no particular interest in maintaining the market value of the medallions; they remain scarce only because the city prefers to limit the number of taxis on the roads, and as a concession to the taxi industry so that they will acquiesce to the city's rules with less of a fight. If demand for taxis drops below the number the city is willing to tolerate, for whatever reason, you shouldn't expect the city to prop up the value of the medallions just because you're counting on it as your retirement plan.
refurb 5y ago
Few drivers owned a medallion. Mostly owned by large cops.

by ipaddr 5y ago

nybble41 5y ago

Basing your retirement plan around the continuing artificial scarcity of taxi medallions is not smart. The city has no obligation to keep the medallions scarce; their value can drop to zero overnight due to changing regulations (or a drop in demand for taxi services, e.g. because a better public transportation system was implemented) and they won't owe you a dime. You'd be far better off working with Uber instead and putting the money you saved by not needing to buy a medallion into a diversified retirement portfolio.

TeMPOraL 5y ago
Medallions don't come out of thin air. It's the cities that provide them. The cities want this, because taxis are meant to be a component of the city transportation system. They're not there to compete with public transit, they're there to augment it - to service the needs that a bus or a train can't. A medallion comes with a requirement to fulfill those needs, as the city sees fit. The relationship between public mass transit, and private taxis (and private mass transit) was cooperative. The relationship between city transportation systems and Uber is hostile.
- nybble41 5y ago
  The cities don't provide medallions, they mandate them and limit the supply. The default state without the city's intervention (i.e. no medallions needed to operate a taxi) is equivalent to having a superabundance of medallions. As you say, they do this in order to bring taxis in line with their plans for city-wide public transportation. Which is not to say that they wouldn't discard the medallion system the moment something better came along to fulfill a similar role. The city has no particular interest in maintaining the market value of the medallions; they remain scarce only because the city prefers to limit the number of taxis on the roads, and as a concession to the taxi industry so that they will acquiesce to the city's rules with less of a fight. If demand for taxis drops below the number the city is willing to tolerate, for whatever reason, you shouldn't expect the city to prop up the value of the medallions just because you're counting on it as your retirement plan.

refurb 5y ago

Few drivers owned a medallion. Mostly owned by large cops.