Taxis in my areas are a municipally regulated monopoly on fare-for-(uncontracted)-hire services. There are a lot of reasons why they devolved to the level of s

Taxis in my areas are a municipally regulated monopoly on fare-for-(uncontracted)-hire services. There are a lot of reasons why they devolved to the level of service that we associated with them: 1) lack of competition 2) internally there is no reward for excellent service 3) as a regulated industry, the internal players will try to stretch the margins to make it more profitable to address either a) greed, b) actual operational needs--cash only, "my terminal is offline", fake terminals, tourist routes Most of this points to failings with how the models are implemented: - diffuse reward system that doesn't account for fare-taker's feedback - slow, high-effort negotiation modification to a) fares, b) license / medallion holder needs, c) driver's needs, d) fare-taker's needs and feedback Consider the differences between Uber and Taxi: 1) feedback is tied directly to driver and passengers 2) feedback is instant 3) Uber dictates pricing and can do so based on a regional, time, legal games, and overall load basis on a low latency regional authority's direction (one person could make that decision based on their local knowledge of upcoming concerts and NFL games, or the status of their application for licensing with the city) 4) individual drivers are now the liability / cost holding party One thing that I think should be in your mind is "who is losing in either model and why?"