How government hinders business - this time in Cambridge

  1. You have chosen to ignore posts from Hansoribrother. Show Hansoribrother's posts

    How government hinders business - this time in Cambridge

    The City of Cambridge is going after Uber. Uber provides extra income for thousands of drivers and provides a great service for riders. Yet the City of Cambridge wants to interfere:


     


    From http://www.bizjournals.com/boston/blog/startups/2014/06/cambridge-considering-regulations-cracking-down-on.html" rel="nofollow">http://www.bizjournals.com/boston/blog/startups/2014/06/cambridge-considering-regulations-cracking-down-on.html


     


    According to a draft version of the rules and a blog post on Uber's site, the regulations would set a $50 minimum price for any non-taxi car ride, regardless of time or distance; prohibit a customer from requesting a ride on-demand from anyone other than a taxi; and forbid any technological device from being part of fare calculation during a ride. The rules would also address vehicles and wheelchair accessibility as well as licensing drivers who rely on smartphone apps.


     


    THis is clearly a case of government getting involved too deeply in an area that would be better off less regulated. The main issue is that the traditional taxi driver is losing business because they have to charge too much and can't operate in a way to provide better customer service like Uber can. Why do they have to charge too much? The biggest reason is the phony fee they have to pay for a medallion. Cambridge, like most other cities limits the number of medallions. Why do that? There is no value associated with a medallion other than it is a phony license to operate.


     


    Tough tiddies to taxi companies. If they can't compete, too bad. Get into another business.

     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from Hansoribrother. Show Hansoribrother's posts

    Re: How government hinders business - this time in Cambridge

    In response to WhatNowDoYouWant's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    This isn't an example of "regulation" in general being bad. It's an example of improper protection of a local business against a market entrant.

    [/QUOTE]

    Protection through what? Obama executive order?

     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from DirtyWaterLover. Show DirtyWaterLover's posts

    Re: How government hinders business - this time in Cambridge

    Aren't taxis regulated?  How is uber different from a taxi service?  If people don't want taxis to be regulated then change the law. Don't undermine the people trying to obey the law. 

     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from Hansoribrother. Show Hansoribrother's posts

    Re: How government hinders business - this time in Cambridge

    In response to DirtyWaterLover's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Aren't taxis regulated?  How is uber different from a taxi service?  If people don't want taxis to be regulated then change the law. Don't undermine the people trying to obey the law. 

    [/QUOTE]

    Uber is not a taxi service. It is a ride or livery service. You arrange for someone to pick you up at a certain time, versus hailing a taxi cab or calling for a cab to come pick you up. Uber obeys the law. Cambridge is trying to change the law in order to eliminate Uber service from Cambridge.

     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from xXR3S1NXx. Show xXR3S1NXx's posts

    Re: How government hinders business - this time in Cambridge

    In response to WhatNowDoYouWant's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to Hansoribrother's comment:

     

     

    [QUOTE]

     



    In response to WhatNowDoYouWant's comment:
    []

     

    This isn't an example of "regulation" in general being bad. It's an example of improper protection of a local business against a market entrant.

     

    []

    Protection through what?


    [/QUOTE]


     

     

    Eh? Protection of yellow cab companies through the restrictions you mention.

     

    I'm saying this isn't a typical regulation that at least attempts to have its heart in the right place. It sounds like a deliberate attempt to smash Uber through regulation.

    [/QUOTE]


    Sounds like Taxi company's might be lining the pockets of Reps in cambridge as well.

     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from DirtyWaterLover. Show DirtyWaterLover's posts

    Re: How government hinders business - this time in Cambridge

    In response to Hansoribrother's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to DirtyWaterLover's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Aren't taxis regulated?  How is uber different from a taxi service?  If people don't want taxis to be regulated then change the law. Don't undermine the people trying to obey the law. 

    [/QUOTE]

    Uber is not a taxi service. It is a ride or livery service. You arrange for someone to pick you up at a certain time, versus hailing a taxi cab or calling for a cab to come pick you up. Uber obeys the law. Cambridge is trying to change the law in order to eliminate Uber service from Cambridge.

    [/QUOTE]

    Wait - I get picked up by someone.  Get driven to a destination.  And then give them money.  How is this different than a taxi?  Do the Uber drivers have chauffeur licenses?  Like I said, if people want to deregulate the cab industry, then let's have a debate.  But don't undermine people playing by the rules.

     

Share