Taxi cabs are just one of the professions suffering from the problem of competition being in conflict with professional standards (ie, self-regulation). The only option that will be fully serviceable remains government regulation, but it will need to take on a new format.
Uber isn’t the problem; taxi regulations are
11–20 of 120 posts
Re: Uber isn’t the problem; taxi regulations are
#12While i agree with the premise that many taxi regulations are outdated, this article seems to be either poorly informed, or so selective in its representation that it borders on PR, not independent journalism or OP-ED.
Using london as an example of how things are broken is a terrible choice, and great example of how terrible this article is. London routinely ranks number one in the world in customer and tourist satisfaction for taxis. As someone who lives here, i think Uber has its place, but the taxi system is akin to a public good that needs regulation. The barriers to entry and designed to prevent abuse to the privileges that come with being licensed taxi. As a rider, the most important privileges to me are the ability to use bus lanes, and that i can hail a cab anywhere, anytime, knowing that the vehicle and driver will be safe. Without regulation, its impossible to obtain that standard.
It would be much more helpful to start with an informed and complete view of the situation (which varies in every city), than build a straw man from which the author argues for a complete reform in governance and regulation in all marketplaces(really? thats the point here?)
Re: Uber isn’t the problem; taxi regulations are
#13The article concentrates on aspects that are certainly archaic - the expectancy that a taxi driver knows every street in a city. On the other hand, it totally ignores the benefits of the regulation: the client can have normalized expectations over all businesses. E.g. in germany, your insurance status if an Uber car crashes is unknown - it depends whether the driver is insured. On the other hand, it is clearly regula…
Is that really a problem? If he's not insured you're just gonna sue him or Uber.
Suing takes time, and even if you succeed the person/company might not be able to pay. Insurance companies pay out immediately if there are medical bills to pay.
Re: Uber isn’t the problem; taxi regulations are
#14Earlier quoted context omitted.
Is that really a problem? If he's not insured you're just gonna sue him or Uber.
And who should pay for that lawsuit?
You or lawyer takes the cut after winning. Case like that will make Uber to require insurance from all drivers. Problem solved without extra regulations and bureaucracy that will cause problem in the future, as we have now.
Re: Uber isn’t the problem; taxi regulations are
#15>>Most notoriously, attaining “The Knowledge” required for a taxi license involves memorizing hundreds of routes, business locations, and places of interest throughout the city. Charming, but expensive — and quite unnecessary in the age of smartphones. Says a person who has never been to London and doesn't understand the enormous benefit of intimate knowledge of all the streets of London and how to navigate them quic…
Last time I was in London, I mentioned the name of a grotty backpackers hostel, not even remembering what road it was on, and the driver immediately started off towards it.
Compare this to having to mess about on Google Maps for five minutes to figure out where we're going and potentially end up on the wrong side of the city anyway, which has happened to me in other cities. There's definitely something in having your driver have knowledge of the city.
Re: Uber isn’t the problem; taxi regulations are
#16I have no problem with regulation. I object to artificial limitation. If you want to set minimum standards for taxi drivers, to ensure the safety of drivers, I am absolutely fine with that. But anyone who wants to take the test should be able to, and there should be no artificial limit on the numbers.
One interesting aspect of limiting taxi numbers is that, as far as I understand the history, the first instance of doing so was imposed on taxi drivers by the public, rather than imposed by taxi drivers for guild-type reasons. London passed (one of?) the first taxi-regulation laws in the mid 17th century in response to popular outcry about the rapidly multiplying and unregulated hackney carriage operators; the law tr…
This is a fascinating piece of historical context. Regulation has a demand side, nut just a supply side.
Worth keeping in mind.
Likewise, the public tends to demand regulation when the cognitive overhead is prohibitive for an individual,[1] bur more economic at scale by a neutral party. The latter is especially efficient ex ante as opposed to ad hoc.
Again, there are multiple views on what is rational, light and efficient depending only on abstraction and completeness.
[1] Eg, when faced with too much choice, under too small a timeframe, with opaque or imperfect information, and costly information processing techniques.
Re: Uber isn’t the problem; taxi regulations are
#17Earlier quoted context omitted.
And who should pay for that lawsuit?
You or lawyer takes the cut after winning. Case like that will make Uber to require insurance from all drivers. Problem solved without extra regulations and bureaucracy that will cause problem in the future, as we have now.
That's right, you won't find any regulations or bureaucracy in the court system!
Re: Uber isn’t the problem; taxi regulations are
#18>>Most notoriously, attaining “The Knowledge” required for a taxi license involves memorizing hundreds of routes, business locations, and places of interest throughout the city. Charming, but expensive — and quite unnecessary in the age of smartphones. Says a person who has never been to London and doesn't understand the enormous benefit of intimate knowledge of all the streets of London and how to navigate them quic…
Absolutely, and the best kind of learning is learning by doing.
Re: Uber isn’t the problem; taxi regulations are
#19Uber isn’t the problem; taxi regulations are
Can't it be both? Because I'm pretty sure it's both.
Re: Uber isn’t the problem; taxi regulations are
#20Earlier quoted context omitted.
Is that really a problem? If he's not insured you're just gonna sue him or Uber.
Suing takes time, and even if you succeed the person/company might not be able to pay. Insurance companies pay out immediately if there are medical bills to pay.
We're talking Germany here. Free healthcare.