Slashdot Mirror
NYC Taxi Commission Nixes Cab-Hailing Apps
An anonymous reader writes "Uber is a company that creates apps to connect taxi and limo drivers with potential passengers. They've been rapidly expanding their service to cities across the country, but they're now getting pushback from New York City. This week the NYC Taxi and Limousine Commission issued a public notice saying, 'A driver must not use any electronic communication device (PDF), including a cell phone or smartphone running a hail or payment app, while operating a taxicab.' The commission says its current contractual obligations forbid the use of such technology."
They can use it while they're parked waiting for a fare, but not while driving. Makes sense for safety.
Why is there a commission to decide whether I can drive you from A to B for a fee and whether you can call or text me on the phone to arrange it and to whom I have to pay a very substantial annual fee for the privilege of doing so? The answer: its a legalized racket, just like all business licensing.
Negative moral value of force outweighs the positive value of good intentions.
Basically a cabbie in new york, according to regulations, HAS to stop for anybody that hails them.
So bascially, this app makes cabbies into a pusedo limo service. They by pass people on the street hailing them, and go pick up the appointment.
but what is boils down to is, once again, government regulations stopping free enterprise. They need to drop this silly non-sense about limo service vs taxi service.
If you don't understand why taxis are legally required to pick up anyone hailing them,
then I guess this doesn't make sense and you can shoehorn this into the traditional
"government regulations are stifling free enterprise" world view.
There's a reason that the police and Taxi & Limosine Commision conducts sting operations to make sure that drivers are following the law.
The main ones being: you can't charge handicapped passengers more, you can't kick someone out for wanting to go to a hospital,
you can't discriminate based on race, and you can't refuse service based on destination.
More often than not, regulations are there because "free enterprise" misbehaved,
not because the big bad government is out to stop free enterprises from making money.
[Fuck Beta]
o0t!
More often than not, these well-meaning regulations are twisted to serve special interests once the regulations have outlived their useful purpose.
Are you claiming that the regulations requiring taxis to pick up all passengers has outlived its useful purpose?
I cannot deny that regulations can end up serving special interests instead of the general public.
My rebuttal is that we should have better regulation, not no regulation.
In this particular case, the regulations governing taxis generally serve the public and the regulations should remain that way.
The difference is, with free enterprise, you can opt out of a corrupt or discriminatory business or even create your own competing one.
The balance of power is not equal between someone who wants a service and someone who provides a service.
This is why we have regulations.
Without regulations, there are monopolies and oligopies, not competition and free markets.
This is what history shows us and ideology frequently strives to ignore or deny.
[Fuck Beta]
o0t!