6 ms·
FTA: "In the late 1930s, there were just under 12,000 medallions in circulation; more than 75 years later, in a city larger by one million people and benefiting
by discardorama 11y ago
FTA: "In the late 1930s, there were just under 12,000 medallions in circulation; more than 75 years later, in a city larger by one million people and benefiting from far greater prosperity, there are only 13,000."
Population growth alone would require another 600 medallions. But remember: in the 1930s, we were just coming out (or on the upswing) of the Great Recession; so affluence would dictate a much larger number. So why is the number so low?
> Instead, arcane aspects of state and local law and, crucially, the power wielded by wealthy and politically generous fleet owners — who don’t want to see the creation of more medallions lest the value of theirs decline — make that [more medallions] virtually impossible.
There you have it. It is, for the lack of a better word, greed. When you have hedgefunds owning medallions[1], you know it's a bad sign. Essential services for the general populace should not be a vehicle for hedge funds.
An ideal (or, a better) system would be responsive. It would look at how busy cabs are, and accordingly change the number of medallions in circulation.
Every year (or every nth year, take your pick), have a Dutch auction[2] of the desired number of medallions. Disallow renting of medallions (only the owner gets to drive the cab), which will kill speculation. Put an app around the whole system, so users can hail cabs from their mobile devices. Pain eased.
[1] http://www.wsj.com/articles/SB10001424052702303653004579214314123978606 http://www.wsj.com/articles/SB100014240527023036530045792143...
[2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dutch_auction https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dutch_auction
- revelation 11y agoHow are there so little medallions, yet so many idle taxis? And taxi drivers still making barely over minimum wage (if you subtract the living costs)? This theory that greedy property owners stifled medallion creation is certainly appealing but it doesn't seem supported by the facts at hand.
- mcintyre1994 11y agoCan you elaborate what you mean by subtracting living costs? Are you saying that after all necessary expenses they have slightly more than minimum wage left over? That seems like a wage that shouldn't be compared to just minimum wage, given that in many places (I don't know about new York) minimum wage is below what you'd consider a living wage that covers necessary expenses.
- maxerickson 11y agoPresumably the driver take home is calculated after they pay to rent or own a medallion. So if they have low pay that just indicates there are plenty of willing drivers to service the available medallions, it is harder to go from their wages to a conclusion about whether the number of medallions is appropriate.
- dreamdu5t 11y agoEven better would be to just get rid of taxi medallions and let anyone who passes basic safety regulations drive people where they want to go for money. Safety regulations do not require a medallion system. Artificially limiting the number of jobs for this industry is not necessary to impose safety regulations. Its only unique purpose is to restrict competition and grant a few drivers a monopoly at the expense of consumers and all other would-be drivers. I don't see anyone arguing that the number of software developers needs to be arbitrarily capped to prevent software bugs. That makes about as much sense as taxi monopolies.
- rjbwork 11y ago>I don't see anyone arguing that the number of software developers needs to be arbitrarily capped to prevent software bugs. Though, now that you mention it...
- boona 11y ago>An ideal (or, a better) system would be responsive. Like a situation of economic freedom where millions of individual actors and entrepreneurs can dynamically change the landscape of city transportation instead of imposing a one size fits all scheme?
- pkulak 11y agoWell, that would work in a perfect system. In our current system, however, roads are "free". So, if you make driving a cab free and unlimited on those free roads, you just end up with a tragedy of the commons. Medallions solve that, but so would an appropriate gas tax (hint, many times higher than it is now) or some other kind of per-mile payment for road use.
- nmrm2 11y agoOne reason to prefer the Medallion system is that both of the latter two options end up disproportionately impacting low-income people. The goal is to limit the number of cabs on the road without creating unreasonable barriers to other economic activity using the roadways. This can be done without Medallions, though. Cities could just require a license for taxis, like they do for many other businesses. If that license cheap enough that anyone can afford it (perhaps with a small business loan) but expensive enough to slightly deter entry, then it solves the commons problem without leading to cronyism.
- jsprogrammer 11y agoA gas tax effectively exempts vehicles that don't use gasoline (eg. fuel-cell or battery backed electric vehicles). A daily "vehicle fee" to have a vehicle within the city might solve your problem.
- twic 11y agoIn London, we call it a 'congestion charge': https://tfl.gov.uk/modes/driving/congestion-charge https://tfl.gov.uk/modes/driving/congestion-charge Although, as a matter of policy, ultra-low emission vehicles like electric cars didn't have to pay it.
- maxerickson 11y agoIf the goal is to balance having enough taxis available but not too many on the road at a given time, why not make the adjustments every hour or day?
- DasIch 11y agoHow would you enforce that?
- maxerickson 11y agoCab rides are already tracked, so there would just need to be a way of notifying the drivers of the current fee for taking a fare.
- deleted 11y ago[deleted]
- pekk 11y agoThat may all be true, but it's a reason to reform the law, not for some people to get away with breaking the law while others cannot.