4 ms·

But everyone isn't getting treated fairly. Is it fair to the cab company to have to service areas they normally wouldn't? Perhaps some of the cab drivers don't

But everyone isn't getting treated fairly. Is it fair to the cab company to have to service areas they normally wouldn't? Perhaps some of the cab drivers don't feel safe traveling to certain areas. I couldn't get cable where I lived in upstate NY because I was in a remote area. Should the cable company have been forced to provide service to my house to make things fair? What you call "fair" only seems to apply to one side of the equation. I'm also not convinced that poorer people would lose out on service. Can you cite anything for that? It seems like there would still be options, even if the quality weren't as good.

rayiner 13y ago
> I couldn't get cable where I lived in upstate NY because I was in a remote area. Should the cable company have been forced to provide service to my house to make things fair? In fact many municipalities grant cable monopolies for precisely that purpose. Do I think this is a good idea? No, I don't think it's that valuable to service people outside dense urban areas. If they want services, they should move closer to the city. However, I don't think its fair to decry a cable monopoly for invoking the protection it receives as part of such a bargain against a competitor.