3 ms·
1. No, I'm not claiming no one would use taxicabs or would ever choose taxicabs over Uber; I refer to a series of hypothetical transactions in which an individu
by fennecfoxen 13y ago
1. No, I'm not claiming no one would use taxicabs or would ever choose taxicabs over Uber; I refer to a series of hypothetical transactions in which an individual would choose Uber over taxicabs in the absence of the government pressuring the system one way or another.
2. The business activity's externalities (e.g. contributing to congestion) could hypothetically be involved in an answer to my question!! While rhetorical, the question does have good answers from time to time. However, in this case, I don't believe the proposed cap is going to be very effective at mitigating those externalities, and the general concept of a "level playing field" is orthogonal to externality mitigation.
- trhway 13y ago>the general concept of a "level playing field" is orthogonal to externality mitigation. no. If one operator is paying for externality mitigation, it is only natural to level playing field by making other operators in the same business space to pay for the same externality mitigation.