472 replies to this topic

[VicHockeyFan]

Remind me again why the taxi cab industry needs to be so heavily regulated? Why does somebody need a cab license to give me a ride for a fee? 

 

Who knows.  Any jack can give you a ride for free.  Government sees money, and they want a piece.  

 

Limos have minimum trip fees ($75 on the Mainland).

[G-Man]

^ There are cheaper limo rides than that from YVR to downtown.

[jonny]

Limos have minimum trip fees ($75 on the Mainland).

 

Really? I've haggled with limo drivers and paid far less for trips than that.

[jklymak]

They understand they are getting rid of ads.  They simply do not understand or care about the implications of what they are doing, that's deep thought.  People buying online is ruining retailers, people buying Chinese hurts us, but nobody cares in the end.

Sigh...  Individuals do what is best for themselves if they see that other people are doing it. i.e. I might be against cheap Chinese imports as a whole, but if I know Joe and Mary bought a TV for $500, I'm not going to pay $700 for the same thing built in North America, even if I could easily afford it.  But society could decide to slap duties on the cheaper goods produced unethically.

 

Individually it might be better for me to take a ride on Uber to get to the airport tomorrow, but is it the best thing for society in the long run?  What happens in 5 years and there are no cab companies, and Uber decides to jack the fares up Fri and Sat. nights to $30/mile?  ...as Uber does.  You can argue that a competitor will come in and undercut them, and maybe thats true, but in the meantime transportation becomes a whole lot harder.  

[VicHockeyFan]

Sigh...  Individuals do what is best for themselves if they see that other people are doing it. i.e. I might be against cheap Chinese imports as a whole, but if I know Joe and Mary bought a TV for $500, I'm not going to pay $700 for the same thing built in North America, even if I could easily afford it.  But society could decide to slap duties on the cheaper goods produced unethically.

 

Individually it might be better for me to take a ride on Uber to get to the airport tomorrow, but is it the best thing for society in the long run?  What happens in 5 years and there are no cab companies, and Uber decides to jack the fares up Fri and Sat. nights to $30/mile?  ...as Uber does.  You can argue that a competitor will come in and undercut them, and maybe thats true, but in the meantime transportation becomes a whole lot harder.  

 

And this is all fine, it's how the market works.  It's good that a competitor is always close by to come in and sell at a loss for some time to gain market share (see: Amazon). 

 

You know, I'd love to see a grocery store add a "living wage" option to your grocery bill.  When you approach the cashier, he asks, will that be a regular buy, or would you like the "living wage total"? - that adds 10 cents to every item.  Those 10-cents are all added together and pooled to all employees based on hours worked.  See how many people choose to get that added on.  Everyone likes the idea of a $15 minimum wage - until if affects them.

[jonny]

Consumers maximize their utility. It's that simple.

 

Am I going to pay $1,000 for a piece of junk RCA TV Made in the USA, or am I going to pay $500 for a quality Samsung TV manufactured in Korea?

 

Where do ethics come into play? Why does a person in Ohio deserve a manufacturing job any more than a person in Korea?

[jklymak]

Consumers maximize their utility. It's that simple.

 

Am I going to pay $1,000 for a piece of junk RCA TV Made in the USA, or am I going to pay $500 for a quality Samsung TV manufactured in Korea?

 

Where do ethics come into play? Why does a person in Ohio deserve a manufacturing job any more than a person in Korea?

Oh I agree, I'm just saying that we can't then turn around and complain as a society that we are losing jobs to Korea. Furthermore, expecting market forces to correct such losses is unreasonable, and that what any individual wants in any given case  (cheap goods), is not necessarily what society wants (a strong in-country manufacturing sector).

[jonny]

Oh I agree, I'm just saying that we can't then turn around and complain as a society that we are losing jobs to Korea. Furthermore, expecting market forces to correct such losses is unreasonable, and that what any individual wants in any given case  (cheap goods), is not necessarily what society wants (a strong in-country manufacturing sector).

 

As a society we are funny. We are just so damn inconsistent. 

 

We don't complain that we don't have TV manufacturing jobs in North America anymore, but propose building a ship outside of Canada and God damnit fire will be rained down upon you.

 

Do we care the all the government's TVs, smart phones, computers, helicopters, jets and who knows whatever else are sourced from outside of Canada? Nope. But a ship? Oh my!

[Mike K.]

They understand they are getting rid of ads.  They simply do not understand or care about the implications of what they are doing, that's deep thought.  People buying online is ruining retailers, people buying Chinese hurts us, but nobody cares in the end.

 

Everyone knows ads generate revenue. And common sense implies that removing the ads removes that source of revenue for a web publisher. And you're right, most people just choose not to care. But meanwhile, unlike with retailers, individuals on websites with ad blockers still use the resources the publisher must pay for. At least a retailer isn't giving away their products free of charge to whomever walks into their store.

 

Everyone using Uber knows they're screwing a licensed and insured cab company.

[Mike K.]

Ok, so you're saying taxi drivers are in the wrong business now thanks to Uber.

[sebberry]

The taxi industry didn't see a need to innovate - everything was going just fine for them.  Customers called for or hailed a cab, went for a ride and paid at the other end. 

Then Uber came along.

 

 

 

Bluebird has an iPhone app you can order a taxi with, Victoria Taxi has an iPhone and Android app and Yellow Cab has nothing.  No BlackBerry app for the thousands of government workers and other banking, legal, etc... employees downtown. 

[Mike K.]

The issue here isn't so much that someone is or isn't innovating, it's more about a technology using a loophole to circumvent a regulated, tax paying, and insured industry. Anyone can do this, I mean where does it end? Why can't we have a guy with a float plane picking up passengers from the harbour and flying them to wherever?

AirBnB has done the same for lodging and now some jurisdictions are cracking down. Ad blockers are no different and they too will be reigned in eventually but that won't happen as quickly as brick and mortar businesses still garner more attention from regulators.

[spanky123]

^ Agreed.

 

The real debate with Uber and Airbnb is about taxes, regulation and compliance. I am sure that the taxi and hotel industry would be happy to drop any objection that they have to these companies if they were allowed to play by the same rules (or lack of).

 

I am against most forms of Government regulation but there are some instances where it is necessary. I don't want unsafe, uninsured vehicles driven by convicted felons driving my kids around town. I also don't want my neighbours converting their homes to rooming houses with people coming and going at all hours of the day and night.

[Mike K.]

The real debate with Uber and Airbnb is about taxes, regulation and compliance. I am sure that the taxi and hotel industry would be happy to drop any objection that they have to these companies if they were allowed to play by the same rules (or lack of).

 

I am against most forms of Government regulation but there are some instances where it is necessary. I don't want unsafe, uninsured vehicles driven by convicted felons driving my kids around town. I also don't want my neighbours converting their homes to rooming houses with people coming and going at all hours of the day and night.

 

Of course it is. Uber is a pirate. Airbnb is a pirate. Ad blocker is a pirate. And there are dozens of other technologies affecting dozens of other industries in the same way.

[thundergun]

I'm not necessarily pro-Uber but I am for taking the restriction off the number of cab licenses because the system is broken. I think anyone driving people for money should be properly licensed and pay taxes on that income, but I don't think  governments should be in the business of controlling the number of licenses. That's equivalent to limiting the number of coffee shops in a city.

 

Here's a good oped piece on the rediculous industry:

http://www.vancouver...0418/story.html

[spanky123]

I'm not necessarily pro-Uber but I am for taking the restriction off the number of cab licenses because the system is broken. I think anyone driving people for money should be properly licensed and pay taxes on that income, but I don't think  governments should be in the business of controlling the number of licenses. That's equivalent to limiting the number of coffee shops in a city.

 

Here's a good oped piece on the rediculous industry:

http://www.vancouver...0418/story.html

 

I agree on the number of licenses and to some extent market supply/demand forces will control that.  I think that at the end of the day we are going to arrive at a compromise where Uber is forced to ensure that its drivers undergo proper background checks, have proper insurance and licensing, and properly post rates. The taxi companies on the other hand will have their license fees eliminated or greatly reduced and have more flexibility. The $64K question then will be can Uber compete when it charges its drivers 2x as much as cab companies charge theirs and no longer have a pricing advantage.

Edited by spanky123, 27 November 2014 - 01:33 PM.

[sebberry]

I've moved several of the posts on internet advertising that were not somehow linked to the Taxi/Uber discussion here: http://vibrantvictor...om-taxi-thread/

 

Thanks

[Greg]

For the people I know who use Uber in the States it is not about cost savings. It is about ease of use. Order online, track the car coming, payment through app (no cash, no fumbling about with a credit card machine that doesn't work at the end of the ride). For the most part I don't think Uber is stealing business from traditional cab companies on price, they are doing it on service. And that is not a function of skirting regulations, it is a function of performing better. I have no problem with pushing for appropriate insurance requirements and so forth, but most of the cab companies that are squawking seem to be more focused on protecting their government-supported marketplace restrictions on competition. They should spend that effort improving their service offering, they already have brand recognition and market share, if they get beat it is their own fault and they deserve to lose to the disruptive technology.

[spanky123]

For the people I know who use Uber in the States it is not about cost savings. It is about ease of use. Order online, track the car coming, payment through app (no cash, no fumbling about with a credit card machine that doesn't work at the end of the ride). For the most part I don't think Uber is stealing business from traditional cab companies on price, they are doing it on service. And that is not a function of skirting regulations, it is a function of performing better. I have no problem with pushing for appropriate insurance requirements and so forth, but most of the cab companies that are squawking seem to be more focused on protecting their government-supported marketplace restrictions on competition. They should spend that effort improving their service offering, they already have brand recognition and market share, if they get beat it is their own fault and they deserve to lose to the disruptive technology.

 

I don't know many cab drivers who make huge salaries on their 'Government supported marketplace restrictions'! There is no doubt that Uber and others have made taking a cab easier, but the reality is that the reason why they are introducing lower cost services like Uberx is because the convenience alone factor isn't enough and they need to grow their market.

 

I liken this to a guy that sets up a kiosk on a vacant piece of property and starts selling goods out of the back of his truck with no tax, no business license and no insurance. We wouldn't call him disruptor because he thinks that he can circumvent the rules by ordering over the web and having the goods 'shipped'.

Edited by spanky123, 28 November 2014 - 11:25 AM.

[pherthyl]

And this is all fine, it's how the market works.  It's good that a competitor is always close by to come in and sell at a loss for some time to gain market share (see: Amazon). 

 

You know, I'd love to see a grocery store add a "living wage" option to your grocery bill.  When you approach the cashier, he asks, will that be a regular buy, or would you like the "living wage total"? - that adds 10 cents to every item.  Those 10-cents are all added together and pooled to all employees based on hours worked.  See how many people choose to get that added on.  Everyone likes the idea of a $15 minimum wage - until if affects them.

 

Congratulations, you've invented the concept of tipping       We are already doing exactly this every time we go to a restaurant.   Doesn't mean it's not a bad idea though. I'd much rather not tip people and have the cost of their living wage built into the product.