3 ms·
This is just good old fashioned corruption. God knows why these cities initiated the system back in the 30s, but they probably did it at the behest of the cab o
by hristov 14y ago
This is just good old fashioned corruption. God knows why these cities initiated the system back in the 30s, but they probably did it at the behest of the cab owners - back then medallions were cheap and cab owners just assumed they would own their own medallion and use it to protect themselves from "excessive competition."
Now there is a group of investors that are very well connected in city politics that own the medallions, so nobody can even think about changing the system. Medallion owners will always set the rules in their favor.
Cab drivers and operators nowadays are usually poor immigrants. They have very little political power. So they suffer long hours and stress. The average citizens that have to suffer high prices usually tend to blame the immigrant drivers.
Even citizens that know about medallions are not likely to use that as a major voting issues. High cab prices are annoying, but there usually are many higher priority issues in a voters mind election time. Especially in a city like New York.
It is good that slate is shedding some light on this issue. At least makes it less likely that other cities will go down this road.
- glenra 14y agoOne alleged evil of "excessive competition" here is that with open competition you might get a "race to the bottom" wherein cabs that aren't well maintained or that overcharge customers make the most money. The initial apparent advantage of the medallion system is that it gives the regulators quite a lot of control over what cab operators do and it's easy to imagine that power might be used to do good. Standardizing cab appearance and fares so customers aren't confused, standardizing cab behavior in various ways, that sort of thing. The downside of this system is that - like nearly every other regulatory system - it is subject to "regulatory capture". Over the years, the established players in any regulated industry have a huge incentive to convince the regulators to rule in ways that keep out competitors. Eventually market competition no longer serves as a check on bad behavior at all - all that matters is keeping the regulators happy. And the regulators are in the pocket of industry, so customers get screwed.
- metageek 14y agoYes, but that sort of regulation doesn't require medallions.
- yummyfajitas 14y agoThe initial apparent advantage of the medallion system is that it gives the regulators quite a lot of control over what cab operators do and it's easy to imagine that power might be used to do good. We don't to limit competition for that. All we need to do is spend 50% of medallion fees on inspections (with the remainder going to general wasteful NYC spending, e.g. redistributing wealth based on random chance [1]). In a comment on this topic a couple of years ago, I did some calculations showing that by spending only 50% of the yearly medallion fee, we could subject every taxi to an undercover inspection every single day. http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1650659 http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1650659 [1] http://www.nyc.gov/html/hpd/html/apartment/lotteries.shtml http://www.nyc.gov/html/hpd/html/apartment/lotteries.shtml
- chimeracoder 14y ago> redistributing wealth based on random chance That's a little harsh - yes, a lottery is involved, but only because the supply falls far short of the demand. The lottery is conducted only among eligible people anyway (or at least, ineligible people are filtered out after the lottery), and only low-income people receive the apartments in the end.
- deleted 14y ago[deleted]