5 ms·
When people talk about 'heavy regulation', they don't usually specify what regulations they are actually talking about. In Germany for example, Uber is in troub
by anon1385 12y ago
When people talk about 'heavy regulation', they don't usually specify what regulations they are actually talking about. In Germany for example, Uber is in trouble because they are not ensuring that their drivers are insured (a normal private car insurance won't cover commercial operation) and not ensuring that the vehicles have the required level of mechanical safety checks (commercial vehicles require more regular tests because they do far more miles).
When you peel away the vague and emotive language of 'heavy regulation' to look at the actual issues then suddenly things look quite different.
Hands up who on HN thinks filling our roads with uninsured drivers is a good thing? Hands up who thinks mandatory checks on vehicles brakes and other basic safety systems is a bad thing? I think I see pg's hand at the back there. But in general the vast vast majority of people think mandatory insurance is a good idea. That's why nearly all developed countries require it by law.
Uber don't want to actually come out and say 'our drivers are not insured', but make no mistake, thats the kind of thing Uber and SV VCs are talking about when they complain about 'red tape' and 'regulation' and 'lack of entrepreneurial spirit'. Ignoring insurance laws makes it easier for them to undercut law abiding and sociably responsible competitors, and they want to continue to get away with it.
- ekianjo 12y ago> Hands up who on HN thinks filling our roads with uninsured drivers is a good thing? Hands up who thinks mandatory checks on vehicles brakes and other basic safety systems is a bad thing? I think I see pg's hand at the back there. But in general the vast vast majority of people think mandatory insurance is a good idea. That's why nearly all developed countries require it by law. The thing is that instead of making these things "expected" because of market forces, imposing it by law makes it a default for everyone and it becomes a box to tick when you want to operate a taxi, just like many other things. And you end up with people who simply do not give a shit at all about consumer experience and providing a good service at all. That's the key difference with countries were taxis have less regulations: people actually compete on service, for the benefit of everyone, not just the few who are taxi drivers and running a monopoly provided by the State. With this attitude you end up with Taxi drivers who do this job because they see it as a rent, not as a way to make a difference on the market. Yeah, that's the spirit!
- AlisdairO 12y agoI'm in favour of light-touch regulation on taxis (at least in the presence of an outfit that can provide driver reviews), but basic safety/insurance checks aren't something the market is likely to be all that efficient at enforcing. The issues people are going to review on will be driver experience, internal cleanliness, etc. Poor vehicle safety only really becomes a passenger issue at the point it's too late. Lack of insurance is even worse - because it also affects the person your taxi crashes into, who doesn't have any say in the matter at all, market-wise.
- alkonaut 12y agoConsumers can see and value polite drivers and clean cars. I can't determine whether a taxi needs its breaks checked. So obviously I want some form regulation to be in place that guarantees that whatever taxi I get into actually has good breaks. Same thing with whatever paperwork needs to be managed for tax purposes and so on. I as a customer can't see it so it won't emerge by market forces alone. There can always be over- and under-regulation in any market, the places where Uber was born from the "over regulation" probably has quite a lot more regulation, most notably it is probably where you have a system of regulating the NUMBER Of taxis (e.g. "Taxi medallions"). The "regulation" that many oppose to is probably the regulation that actually prevents people from easily getting into the taxi business to meet demand. Regulations regarding safety/insurance etc. I can't imagine either drivers or customers see as a problem. If someone finds getting proper insurance too bureaucratic that is probably a good filter for drivers you don't want on the market.
- pgsandstrom 12y agoThe thing is that insurances and checks on vehicle brakes are not visible for the consumer, and so an uninformed consumer won't care about it until an accident happen. By then, it's too late.
- ekianjo 12y agoI was obviously not just referring about insurances/checks, but the whole regulation package.
- 12y ago
- svdree 12y ago> commercial vehicles require more regular tests because they do far more miles That doesn't make any sense. Sure, high mileage cars probably need to be checked more regularly, but that goes for non-commercial vehicles as well. The fact that money changes hands after a ride does not do anything to the technical state of the car. Same thing for the insurance: if I drive a friend to the airport, that's OK apparently. But if I drive someone else to the airport for money, suddenly I'm not insured anymore? To me this just sounds like people making up rules to protect their own interests.
- rmc 12y agoTheir idea of "disruption" is to ignore the law. And yet the US companies want us to obey their copyright law on media that they won't sell us.