Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

For San Francisco Cab Drivers, Once-Treasured Medallions Now a Burden

ww2.kqed.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 91 posts

Re: For San Francisco Cab Drivers, Once-Treasured Medallions Now a Burden

#71

Post by Camillo »

mistermann wrote: post #58
SilasX wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Hold on -- there's a big difference between "the government reneged on its promise to keep squatters off your land" vs "no one wants your land anymore". If they start turning a blind eye to squatters, it's fair to criticize that government for reneging. If the other city becomes such a vibrant spot that no one wants to live near you -- different story entirely. While local governments are arguably failing to require…

Everything you say is technically correct, but when something has been valuable for a very long time primarily due to government regulation only , and then it suddenly loses most of its value in the span of just a few years, I don't think it's fair for people who just recently entered the market after years of waiting to suffer all the loss (while their predecessors, purely by chance, made their investment back many…

That is really no different from any other investment. If you buy a house, you are relying on the government to uphold your property rights, otherwise anyone could come in and take it over. Let's say you buy a house in SF, hoping for a steady income from rent. Let's say people finally manage to kill the goose that lays the golden eggs, and the tech industry moves to Utah. You're going to lose a lot of money, and the government is under no obligation to make you whole.

I cannot live in a society where profits get concentrated when things go well and losses get spread around when things don't, because that is not a sustainable society.

Re: For San Francisco Cab Drivers, Once-Treasured Medallions Now a Burden

#72

Post by anilgulecha »

ryanobjc wrote: post #62
randyrand wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A medallion is not and never was the only way to be a "taxi." Yes, there is little difference between street hailing and dispatch these days. But the law never guaranteed them immunity from dispatch innovation. No one was scammed. But you can still feel sorry for the guy. If there is one thing to learn - DIVERSIFY YOUR INVESTMENTS!

fair enough, but it's often hard to diversify your time and employment. How do you diversity your investment in your employer?

By renting out the medallion from owners, instead of becoming an owner. So you'd pay more for the medallion per unit time, but have the freedom of moving onto other services when they become more popular.

Re: For San Francisco Cab Drivers, Once-Treasured Medallions Now a Burden

#73

Post by eru »

rubyn00bie wrote: post #50

I had a great professor who specialized in (Economics of) Public Utilities who made a very important distinction about types of regulation; of which, he said there are essentially two: economic and "safety and soundness." He said, about them, economic regulation is strictly* bad. Safety and soundness, is always* good. Make sure you know which type a regulation is, e.g. Many financial regulations are for safety and so…

Of course, you can also regulate for more safety than the public needs. (Eg trains in the rich world are safe enough arguably, but we ask for even more safety from our planes.)

Re: For San Francisco Cab Drivers, Once-Treasured Medallions Now a Burden

#74

Post by eru »

rhino369 wrote: post #31
dmitrygr wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

By that logic apple needs to give me back my $600 for my iPhone3GS He made a bet that value would stay He was wrong Sucks Sad? sure. But not anyone's fault

SF sold them the medallions with the promise that SF is going to limit the number of cabs and now it isn't doing that. That is different from Apple selling you a piece of electronics with a single year warranty and no promise that it's going to be useful in the future.

Was there ever an explicit promise?

Re: For San Francisco Cab Drivers, Once-Treasured Medallions Now a Burden

#75

Post by eru »

austenallred wrote: post #33
unKlever wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think the parent was talking about supply side. I think you are totally correct but, I find myself not satisfied with the answer. All legitimate cab companies should puf money into hiring a company to build a sinple app to connect them to legal taxis. You pay, you get on the app. Tagline, "as convenient as uber, only legal". It would be a hell of a lot cheaper than funding lawyers and lobbyists like they have been.

That's exactly the point though, it's the entire system that needs replacing. It's awfully hard to turn a ship around when it's as large as the taxi industry (with lobbies to boot). Take one element of it - say the taxi companies said, "OK, you're now getting rated, and if you drop below 5 stars you lose your medallion." Drivers would lose their minds. Imagine them saying, "Also, now your trips are going to cost 50%…

> Or even, "You can use your own car, because that's way more efficient" (would never happen, because taxi drivers rent their cars for $40,000/month).

Where is that figure from?

Re: For San Francisco Cab Drivers, Once-Treasured Medallions Now a Burden

#76

Post by sguha »

Meekro wrote: post #8
derekp7 wrote: post #7

Here's the thing I don't understand -- if the main attraction (from a customer point of view) is the app (with everything that comes with it), why haven't the cab companies got in on the same game? Either put out their own app to hail rides (and maybe give their cabs a more luxury look to them), or sign up as Uber/Lyft drivers themselves? Or is there something I'm missing?

They have: https://gocurb.com They've been doing it for a while -- this app used to be Taxi Magic. It's slower to respond than Uber, and more expensive.

Taxi prices are set by the city https://www.sfmta.com/getting-around/taxi/taxi-rates while Uber/Lyft can set their own prices. Maybe taxis should be able to lower their prices and surge up with demand to even the playing field.

Re: For San Francisco Cab Drivers, Once-Treasured Medallions Now a Burden

#77

Post by lololomg »

mschuster91 wrote: post #26
dmitrygr wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

By that logic apple needs to give me back my $600 for my iPhone3GS He made a bet that value would stay He was wrong Sucks Sad? sure. But not anyone's fault

Nope. By issuing a medallion, the city grants the right to participate with known rules of competition in a specific market and it also has the obligation to protect the licensee from unfair competition. The cities have failed to comply with their duty and so, in my opinion, owe damages to the holders.

How exactly did the city fail to comply with their duty? It was always legal to call a (non medalian) car to your location and be driven somewhere. The medalian merely gives you the right to pick up street hails, and that rule is still enforced. The city is doing exactly what it promised.

Re: For San Francisco Cab Drivers, Once-Treasured Medallions Now a Burden

#78

Post by anarazel »

norikki wrote: post #40
x0x0 wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

in sf, specifically, the taxi companies are utter shit (and evil, to boot). I badly broke my leg and, because I lived too far from public transportation to crutch over, had to take taxis to work 4-5 times a week, often both ways. No taxi company in sf will reliably come, even if you make it clear that you are going to take a cab at least 4 days a week for most of the next year. Instead, even when you are in the middl…

I love the 'But Uber is illegal!' argument. A government protected industry is forced to face real competition after years of ignoring their customers needs. Boo Hoo.

Maybe I've a rather european perspective on this: But most of the arguments around Uber's services not being entirely legal here are around the kind of driver's license and such. At least in Germany, and I'm fairly certain it's the same in a couple neigbhouring countries, there's two things to driving a cab in a city: 1) Special kind of driver's permit that allows you to transport passengers in a commercial setting. That includes a background check, medical, and some lower limits how many traffic infractions you can have than a normal driver's license 2) A permit to drive a cab in a specific city/area.

To me requiring a special kind of driver's license to transport passengers makes a fair amount of sense iff it's reasonably easy to get.

Uber doesn't require that for UberX, which is the main point of conflict in many of the trials Uber lost over here.

Re: For San Francisco Cab Drivers, Once-Treasured Medallions Now a Burden

#79

Post by austenallred »

eru wrote: post #75
austenallred wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's exactly the point though, it's the entire system that needs replacing. It's awfully hard to turn a ship around when it's as large as the taxi industry (with lobbies to boot). Take one element of it - say the taxi companies said, "OK, you're now getting rated, and if you drop below 5 stars you lose your medallion." Drivers would lose their minds. Imagine them saying, "Also, now your trips are going to cost 50%…

> Or even, "You can use your own car, because that's way more efficient" (would never happen, because taxi drivers rent their cars for $40,000/month). Where is that figure from?

Whoops. Meant per year, of course, but http://www.entrepreneur.com/article/234289

Re: For San Francisco Cab Drivers, Once-Treasured Medallions Now a Burden

#80

Post by douche »

anarazel wrote: post #78
norikki wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I love the 'But Uber is illegal!' argument. A government protected industry is forced to face real competition after years of ignoring their customers needs. Boo Hoo.

Maybe I've a rather european perspective on this: But most of the arguments around Uber's services not being entirely legal here are around the kind of driver's license and such. At least in Germany, and I'm fairly certain it's the same in a couple neigbhouring countries, there's two things to driving a cab in a city: 1) Special kind of driver's permit that allows you to transport passengers in a commercial setting.…

At least in the U.S. states that I've lived in, drivers licenses are segmented by the type of vehicle that you are allowed to drive, rather than the purpose of driving it. So, for instance, in Maine, there are 3 main tiers:

Class A license - certified to drive tractor-trailer trucks.

Class B license - certification to drive non-tractor trailer multi-axle vehicles; kind of an amorphous collection, but think buses, large commercial panel trucks, dump-trucks, highway plow trucks, etc.

Class C license - any kind of normal passenger automobile.

What I find interesting about Uber, and the backlash against it, is that it is largely just a scaling of under-the-table, unregulated behavior people have always indulged in. What, really, is the difference between calling up your circle of friends and acquaintances, asking for a lift somewhere, and throwing them some cash for gas money and their time, versus using Uber? They are evil because they enable you to search a wider network then just your personal circle? Or because they take a cut for providing a reliable, safe, centralized payment service? Or because they have enabled a market that competes with a rent-capturing incumbent, and the product they provide is cheaper, more convenient, and higher quality?

Post reply on HN