2 ms·

Taxi regulations generally involve limiting the number of taxis. This has two effects (1) they are more expensive than what a market price would be, and (2) you

Taxi regulations generally involve limiting the number of taxis. This has two effects (1) they are more expensive than what a market price would be, and (2) you can't always get a taxi when you want one. So taxi regulation definitely cause drawbacks to customers. Do these drawbacks outweigh the advantages that you enumerate? This could be determined experimentally, by allowing unregulated taxis to offer their services in the market alongside regulated taxis. Unregulated taxis would be obliged to clearly state that they were unregulated, and customers would be able to choose between the two. If proponents of taxi regulations are right, customers will choose the regulated taxis over the unregulated ones.

tptacek 18y ago
That is a gross oversimplification of taxi regulation. You're just fixating on the one regulation that we all agree is ill-considered.
- deleted 18y ago
  [deleted]
- cabalamat 18y ago
  Surely my argument is more general than that? I.e. it applies to more things than just limiting the number of taxis. A regulated taxi system will differ in some ways from an unregulated system. (If it doesn't then the regulation is so light-touch as to be virtually non-existant.) For example the regulated taxis might have safer drivers, or be less likely to rip off customers, etc. Because regualted and unregulated are different, people will have preferences one way or the other. If an unregulated system is allowed to operate side by side with a regulated system, then each customer will be able to choose which one they buy from, like choosing which supermarket they shop at. (Obviously for this to work it must be easy to tell which is regulated and which unregulated). So if people prefer a regulated service to an unregulated one, they'll continue to choose the regulated one even when there's a choice, won't they? Perhaps you'd like to elaborate on why you think I'm making a gross oversimplification, because I think my argument applies to any differences between regulated and unregulated taxis.

tptacek 18y ago

That is a gross oversimplification of taxi regulation. You're just fixating on the one regulation that we all agree is ill-considered.

deleted 18y ago
[deleted]
cabalamat 18y ago
Surely my argument is more general than that? I.e. it applies to more things than just limiting the number of taxis. A regulated taxi system will differ in some ways from an unregulated system. (If it doesn't then the regulation is so light-touch as to be virtually non-existant.) For example the regulated taxis might have safer drivers, or be less likely to rip off customers, etc. Because regualted and unregulated are different, people will have preferences one way or the other. If an unregulated system is allowed to operate side by side with a regulated system, then each customer will be able to choose which one they buy from, like choosing which supermarket they shop at. (Obviously for this to work it must be easy to tell which is regulated and which unregulated). So if people prefer a regulated service to an unregulated one, they'll continue to choose the regulated one even when there's a choice, won't they? Perhaps you'd like to elaborate on why you think I'm making a gross oversimplification, because I think my argument applies to any differences between regulated and unregulated taxis.