Earlier quoted context omitted.
It is written by a good well known exonomist, so i doubt it inthis case
Exonomists can be purchased.
Wait, I thought exonomist was a typo. Does it mean anything different than economist?
London's Uber Ban Is a Big Brexit Mistake
41–50 of 70 posts
Re: London's Uber Ban Is a Big Brexit Mistake
#42This same argument was made when Austin required fingerprinting for drivers and Uber and Lyft left. What happened? Their was a flourishing of new ride share companies, including a local nonprofit, RideAustin. Yes, at first, these apps were nowhere near the level of Uber/Lyft, but they quickly improved, especially RideAustin. The prices were slightly higher, but it seemed those prices reflected the actual cost of the…
You forgot the end of that story. They let Uber and Lyft back in[1] and the apps that had sprouted up instantly got crushed[2]. [1] https://www.curbed.com/2017/6/14/15803138/austin-uber-lyft-t... [2] https://www.bizjournals.com/austin/news/2017/06/06/uber-lyft...
Yep, this happened, but still doesn't change my point that these huge, extremely well VC-funded firms are not so much the giant drivers of innovation the article makes them out to be.
If anything (as mentioned in another HN article I saw today about the slowdown in new business formation), these huge, "winner-take-all" tech companies may be a net negative for innovation in the long run.
Re: London's Uber Ban Is a Big Brexit Mistake
#43This same argument was made when Austin required fingerprinting for drivers and Uber and Lyft left. What happened? Their was a flourishing of new ride share companies, including a local nonprofit, RideAustin. Yes, at first, these apps were nowhere near the level of Uber/Lyft, but they quickly improved, especially RideAustin. The prices were slightly higher, but it seemed those prices reflected the actual cost of the…
VC-subsidized
Private companies don't subsidize. Private companies invest.
Re: London's Uber Ban Is a Big Brexit Mistake
#44Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's not a ban on ride-sharing. It's a ban on a single specific company: Uber. And the ban is because Uber was routinely violating sensible regulations.
What other ride-sharing company operates in London? Addison lee, kabbee and the multiple private cab companies can't offer the same service as uber when you need a ride on the moment. They are fine when you can book in advance, otherwise be prepared to wait half an hour or more.
The fact that there is only one barber, butcher, or baker (or candlestick maker... whatever) in town should not dissuade us from putting them out of business if they don't pay attention to safety regulations...
Re: London's Uber Ban Is a Big Brexit Mistake
#45Of course, Uber needed to be reigned in, but what matters is the symbol here. Black cabs are fairly expensive and mostly driven by white people (which is not the case for private hire vehicles: http://content.tfl.gov.uk/taxi-and-phv-demographic-stats.pdf ) People won't help feeling that this is a "Let's keep our good old ways and our white boys happy" move. The article is right in saying that this general cultural sh…
> Black cabs are fairly expensive and mostly driven by white people
Why is the colour of their drivers a problem? Are you suggesting there's something preventing people who aren't white from driving a cab?
Re: London's Uber Ban Is a Big Brexit Mistake
#46Earlier quoted context omitted.
It was given as a reason in the press release so there is obviously suspicion of it at least. http://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/gadgets-and-tech/new...
If so then they should mentioned incidences which lead to this suspicion. Both mayor and uber has failed to make it clear what the reason of contention is between them. The rules which uber is not following should have been listed instead of arbitrary statements like Uber failed to report crimes by their drivers . This can happen only if victim decides to report to uber instead of police which sounds very unlikely sc…
That's nonsense. If you have a dispute between you and a company, everyone will expect you to talk to the company first. If it turns out that your dispute relates to breach of the law (for instance, improper racial discrimination of clients), you might not necessarily realise you have the ability to report it to the police. To say it sounds like a very unlikely scenario to you makes it sound like you're trying to find reasons to defend Uber, not trying to interpret the scene fairly.
Re: London's Uber Ban Is a Big Brexit Mistake
#47TfL and the Greater London Authority being controlled by notable Brexiteers like Sadiq Khan, of course...
Sadiq Khan a notable brexiteer?
I'm calling you a liar!
Two options: You provide reputable sources to back this assertion of yours. In which case I will profusely, unconditionally and publicly apologize.
Otherwise my assertion that you're a liar stands.
Note that no English tabloid product, nor anything Breitbart counts as a reputable source in this context.
Re: London's Uber Ban Is a Big Brexit Mistake
#48TfL and the Greater London Authority being controlled by notable Brexiteers like Sadiq Khan, of course...
Sadiq Khan a notable brexiteer? I'm calling you a liar! Two options: You provide reputable sources to back this assertion of yours. In which case I will profusely, unconditionally and publicly apologize. Otherwise my assertion that you're a liar stands. Note that no English tabloid product, nor anything Breitbart counts as a reputable source in this context.
parent post sounds like sarcasm to me.
Re: London's Uber Ban Is a Big Brexit Mistake
#49Earlier quoted context omitted.
Who's being forced to use uber/lyft? Ironic that you believe state intervention into markets as being the "will of the consumer".
The Austin fingerprint law was a voter initiative passed by Austin citizens. The state of Texas overturned it by vote of elected representatives from across the state. I think the latter is much more a "state intervention".
It's interesting to precisely consider what "a voter initiative passed by Austin citizens" translates to. And to clarify the fingerprint law was not what was actually passed. That law was passed unilaterally by the city council --- whom a cynic might suggest was driven by what we'll call "lobbying", rather than necessity. The vote was a result of ride sharing services collecting the necessary tens of thousands of signatures that required the City Council to either soften the rules or bring the matter to public vote. The council chose to spend the hundreds of thousands of taxpayer dollars necessary to keep the ordinance intact and hold an impromptu election.
These [1] are the results of that election. Austin has a population of 950,000 residents with a voting age population of about 741,000 [2]. In total about 5% of the resident population voted to maintain the fingerprinting law and 4% to soften it. A 1% margin on a voter turnout of less than 12%.
I fully appreciate that that is a 'democratic republic in action.' I'm certain you can understand one might find it distasteful, just as one can easily understand your distaste for state level 'democratic republic in action.' I'm certain our systems made all the sense in the world hundreds of years ago. But these sort of things do not feel right today when we live in a country with counties that now have greater population than the entire country did when these laws and systems were developed.
[1] - http://traviselectionresults.com/enr/contest/display.do?crit...
[2] - https://www.census.gov/quickfacts/fact/table/austincitytexas...
Re: London's Uber Ban Is a Big Brexit Mistake
#50Earlier quoted context omitted.
Sadiq Khan a notable brexiteer? I'm calling you a liar! Two options: You provide reputable sources to back this assertion of yours. In which case I will profusely, unconditionally and publicly apologize. Otherwise my assertion that you're a liar stands. Note that no English tabloid product, nor anything Breitbart counts as a reputable source in this context.
parent post sounds like sarcasm to me.
If so, my bad that I didn't get it.
In any case it was not very sarcastically phrased. And given the bullshit people believe nowadays such things really need to be called out.