4 ms·
It drives me nuts to see the manic crowds come to the defense of Goliath. Sure, taxi's suck ass in many cities and I really like the accountable based system of
by wahsd 11y ago
It drives me nuts to see the manic crowds come to the defense of Goliath. Sure, taxi's suck ass in many cities and I really like the accountable based system of Uber and their high standards, but that is no justification for essentially handing over a whole market segment to a single monopolist.
What an age we are living through, where all the valued and ideals of competition aren't even given lip service anymore and all of society goes all in on monopolies. Because what can go wrong when monopolies reach the phase where they turn all those lobbyists from market capture goals to regulatory capture goals to lock out any competition in an inherently low barrier to entry industry? Nothing can go wrong, right?
- atourgates 11y ago> handing over a whole market segment to a single monopolist. So long as the regulations aren't specific to Uber, what's to stop Lyft, Sidecar and others from competing in the same space? It seems like in this case, the monopoly is taxies, and the disruptor is still ridesharing services.
- dylanjermiah 11y agoThere will always be alternatives to Uber. Uber is at it's core transportation. It competes on price and quality in more arenas than 'ride sharing'. In regards to your monopoly point. There are very few, of any, natural monopolies. Ones which occur in a real free market.
- deleted 11y ago[deleted]
- deleted 11y ago[deleted]