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

Regulators Demanding Uber Price Increase to $75 Minimum in Vancouver

us1.campaign-archive1.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–59 of 59 posts

Re: Regulators Demanding Uber Price Increase to $75 Minimum in Vancouver

#51

Post by aneth4 »

freshhawk wrote: post #49
aneth4 wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It works just fine for tourists. And regardless, creating a communist style fixed price centrally managed system is not the solution to tourists being scammed. It doesn't solve the problem, raises prices, and limits supply - it's a lose lose for everyone (except monopolists and city hall). The regulatory framework is outdated and unnecessary.

New Yorkers disagree. New York's medallion system has resulted in a world class taxi ecosystem. There are other examples as well. Are there examples of equally good taxi ecosystems in cities without regulation? Or examples of negative consequences which outweigh the good but are not generally accounted for? Evidence based arguments trump ideological arguments. You saying "it's a lose lose" or throwing the word "commu…

The problem with heavy government involvement in any industry is not that it's inherently bad, but that if it is bad, it is very, very hard to change. With minimal good regulation on transparency and accountability (I did not say no regulation,) consumers can quickly vet good providers.

New York is lucky in that it has reasonably good regulation on taxis, though far from perfect - there are many underserved areas for which there is no incentive for taxis to service, and where it is illegal for other parties to service. Along with service at peak times, New York would benefit from eliminating the medallion system and instituting a simple regulatory framework where anyone with appropriate training and licensing can provide taxi service.

Uber is an example of good quality taxi service without (or circumventing) regulation, as is Lyft and the other startups. The negative consequences are obvious simply by looking at the market opportunity and demand for fixes to the broken taxi system. San Francisco suffers from insufficient taxis and an inability to adapt to demand.

The purpose of the regulations has become primarily to protect taxi unions and companies by limiting supply, not to promote safety or prevent fraud.

Re: Regulators Demanding Uber Price Increase to $75 Minimum in Vancouver

#52

Post by anigbrowl »

aneth4 wrote: post #46
anigbrowl wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A simple licensing and complaint system is all that is necessary. That doesn't work very well for tourists, who are the most likely to be scammed, and whose money is highly desirable as it represents an input to the local economy.

It works just fine for tourists. And regardless, creating a communist style fixed price centrally managed system is not the solution to tourists being scammed. It doesn't solve the problem, raises prices, and limits supply - it's a lose lose for everyone (except monopolists and city hall). The regulatory framework is outdated and unnecessary.

It works just fine for tourists.

Perhaps you should offer some evidence to support that assertion. By definition, a tourist is only around temporarily, whereas a complaint can take a long time to process. If a tourist has a bad experience, they're unlikely to return.

Re: Regulators Demanding Uber Price Increase to $75 Minimum in Vancouver

#53

Post by onetwothreefour »

aneth4 wrote: post #46
anigbrowl wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A simple licensing and complaint system is all that is necessary. That doesn't work very well for tourists, who are the most likely to be scammed, and whose money is highly desirable as it represents an input to the local economy.

It works just fine for tourists. And regardless, creating a communist style fixed price centrally managed system is not the solution to tourists being scammed. It doesn't solve the problem, raises prices, and limits supply - it's a lose lose for everyone (except monopolists and city hall). The regulatory framework is outdated and unnecessary.

You don't really have enough insight into this (apart from "regulation bad") to continue the argument. Taxis work fine in a lot of places, there's a reason for their regulation, and that's fine.

Uber is a private car service. That's what they should stick to. Taking on taxis on multiple fronts (different cities, states, countries) is a losing (and, quite frankly, boring) proposition.

The problem, in this case, is attempting to apply SF-sourced corporatism-as-libertarianism to places other than SF. Good luck with that (and I say this as a person who uses Uber as my sole method of transportation, several times a week).

Re: Regulators Demanding Uber Price Increase to $75 Minimum in Vancouver

#54

Post by opendna »

Vancity- wrote: post #27

""" Mary Polak ‏@MaryPolakMLA Passenger Transportation Board is an independent decision maker so gov’t does not influence decision. #bcpoli #UberVanLove """ This makes sense, actually. At first I was angry because there was no system in place for the public to complain/appeal this, but this has nothing to do with public services. If it had to do with buses or other forms of public transportation, then there would be…

For those still following, it turns out that Uber has nothing to appeal because they never submitted an application to the PTB. The PTB did not reject a request by Uber.

It now appears that the PTB barely knew that Uber existed until they started getting hate-mail from angry users.

(The same is true, incidentally of the City of Vancouver. Uber doesn't have the business licenses required to sell bicycle courier services in Vancouver, never mind limousine services.)

The limo drivers and companies who worked with Uber, however, are being hit with fines and other enforcement actions.

Re: Regulators Demanding Uber Price Increase to $75 Minimum in Vancouver

#55

Post by opendna »

makhanko wrote: post #4

As Uber's similar difficulties in New York show, the governments both North and South of the 49th parallel consider city transportation to be their exclusive domain and are not shy to regulate it instead of looking out for consumers. In Vancouver, Canada the quasi-government regional transportation authority is heavily subsidized by taxpayers and is still running in deficit. They are not exactly happy about competiti…

Translink is completely and totally irrelevant to this story. You'd as accurately blame the New York Yankees for Uber's problems in Vancouver.

Re: Regulators Demanding Uber Price Increase to $75 Minimum in Vancouver

#56

Post by opendna »

tomjen3 wrote: post #40

And this will go on until somebody starts to do violence in defence of these kinds of businesses. When enough taxi drivers gets shot, they will change their tone. //Legal disclaimer: the above is a disclaimer of fact and should not be read as inciting violence.

Vancouver taxi drivers have as little power to change BC's vehicle hire laws as Walmart greeters have to change the company's sourcing policies.

The taxi drivers are victims of the taxi license cartels: the only power they have is to stop driving and find another livelihood. If you asked the drivers (or did the most cursory google search) you'd find out that they want reform too. #1 on their list: issue more taxi licenses & smash the cartels.

So, no, if "enough taxi drivers get shot" and "change their tone", it still will NOT change the legal or regulatory environment for Uber.

Re: Regulators Demanding Uber Price Increase to $75 Minimum in Vancouver

#57

Post by opendna »

mtgx wrote: post #2

What business does the Government have to fix the prices of a private company so arbitrarily like this? Surely this isn't constitutional?

Many cities regulate taxis as public utilities, in a similar fashion and logic to the regulation of telephone, power, water and public transit companies. We don't see much discussion of it anymore, but if you look to the early-20th century, you'll find many examples of granting monopoly licenses in exchange for universal service and non-discrimination.

To the extent that you think this is unconstitutional, unprecedented or inherently destructive, I encourage you to look at US economic history before 1970. AT&T's monopoly and rate regulation included transfer pricing which allowed them to subsidize rural services and connect the last mile to (almost) every home and business across North America. (Most of Europe accomplished the same with state-owned telephone companies.) The AT&T monopoly came with the mandate to provide services even where they were unprofitable (and sometimes for free), with the guarantee of profits elsewhere. That regime ultimately extended Bell Labs' $0 transistor licensing, which made the semiconductor industry possible. Similar requirements were made of power utilities, and that's also the logic behind taxi regulations.

Vancouver's taxi laws require at least 6-days/week service, for a minimum of 10hours/24hours. Taxis are (basically) required to accept all fares and serve all areas at all hours, without discrimination. In return for providing universal service (and to keep monitoring practical), the licensed providers were guaranteed a monopoly (and kept small in number). Of course, as soon as you grant a monopoly, you set the stage for price gouging, which is (as with AT&T) where the government-fixed rates come from.

In short: the prices aren't fixed arbitrarily, technocrats use them to advance designated public policy objectives.

Re: Regulators Demanding Uber Price Increase to $75 Minimum in Vancouver

#58

Post by Steve79 »

The law is a funny thing. It is set up not to protect taxi companies or drivers. I it is set up to make sure the public has a reasonable priced service that has to provide service to the entire community. The reason you have an hourly rate for sedans is to differentiate between the two services. The sedan business is lightly regulated and is open market. Uber has set up and illegal service and believes they can bully city hall. Problem is the city realizes that it will be destroyed the taxi industry who the city will expect to do all the unprofitable trips. So if you are bogging her about how you want uber - realize this is a skimming operation. The regulators understand this and the reason you have the 75 rate per hour to start. Uber is not a small company. I think is back by vc groups and wall street investors who do not care that much the taxi cab business is based on public need and necessity.

Re: Regulators Demanding Uber Price Increase to $75 Minimum in Vancouver

#59

Post by freshhawk »

patrickaljord wrote: post #32
freshhawk wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You should know that Translink (aka the South Coast British Columbia Transportation Authority) has nothing whatsoever to do with Taxi's. That's regulated at the provincial level. > quasi-government (sic) aka, the corporate structure used by participating municipalities to operate a unified public transportation system in a metropolitan area > heavily subsidized by taxpayers That's literally what the "public" part in…

> but you don't seem that confused. > your take on things made me think an adult opinion was warranted. This is one of the most arrogant and patronizing comment I've read on HN, you should have read your comment before posting it, you really sounded prickish on this one.

I figured it would come across as at least slightly prickish because it was very very patronizing. I wouldn't say arrogant though, considering the majority of the comment was correcting the easily google-able falsehoods in the parent comment. Arrogant would be preaching your subjective political view while getting all the facts wrong.

I defend the use of patronizing mockery as a proper tool to discourage comments that smugly dismiss facts to push a political ideology.

Post reply on HN