> Opposition to Uber is a clear case of regulatory capture. Every negative outcome that regulation is meant to mitigate (accountability, safety, reliability, discrimination, non-predatory pricing) is better served by Uber (and two-factor location tracking) than traditional cabs. I have not heard anybody raise compelling objections to Uber's model based on objective harm to consumers or market non-participants (negative externalities).
You are aware Uber skimps on background checks that result in real harm to real people [among other problems] right? They also actively fight taxi-equivalent background check requirements?
I think the problem is people really do not understand why the vast majority of these regulations exist in the first place. The vast majority are not instances of "regulatory capture" but basic safety like "Hey, don't hire ex-cons in a line of work where they can trap you in a car" and those are what Uber focuses on repealing/fighting.
http://www.nytimes.com/2014/12/10/technology/ubers-system-fo...
> And in California, Uber and other companies like it helped kill a law that would have required drivers to undergo a background check by the state’s Justice Department, as is required of taxi drivers.
> Uber champions its “industry-leading standards” for vetting its drivers. On its website, it describes its background checks as “often more rigorous” than those in the traditional taxi industry.
> But in statehouses across the country, Uber has fought against legislation requiring background checks as strong as those demanded of traditional taxis. Other ride-sharing companies like Lyft and Sidecar, Uber’s chief rivals, have also pushed against the laws, but supporters of stronger background checks say Uber has been by far the most aggressive.
http://www.cnet.com/news/ubers-background-checks-dont-catch-...
> The driver, Duncan Eric Burton, 57, is an ex-con. He'd spent 14 years in federal prison on drug charges and was released in 2012, according to the Houston Chronicle. And he had cleared Uber's background check.
> How does that happen? The city of Houston believes Uber's background checks aren't thorough enough. That's why Houston is among the few cities to require every Uber driver to be licensed by the city and undergo FBI fingerprint checks. But while the city requires it, Uber doesn't -- allowing people to still drive for the ride-hailing service as long as the authorities don't catch them.
> Case in point: one applicant who cleared Uber's background checks had 24 alias names, five listed birth dates, 10 listed Social Security numbers and an active warrant for arrest, according to a report released last week by Houston's Administration and Regulatory Affairs Department.
https://pando.com/2014/01/06/exclusive-uber-driver-accused-o...
> However, Pando has since learned that the driver -- 28-year-old San Francisco resident Daveea Whitmire -- has a criminal record, including felony and misdemeanor charges, and at least one felony conviction involving prison time. How, or why, Uber missed -- or ignored -- this criminal history is unclear.