Rethinking the Development of the Liberal, Capitalist World Order

[illram]

So I agree Uber is more convenient and it has also spurred cabbies do up their game, i.e. no more claiming the credit card machine doesn't work, no more claiming their shift is over when I tell them I want to go somewhere inconvenient, etc. That's nice for me. But, we got here by Uber and others exploiting the current system. Cabbies are definitely sharing the blame, perhaps the majority of the blame, for what they did with the regulated monopoly they themselves created, but nonetheless Uber and all the rest broke the rules first and then had them changed. It worked out for the consumer so far but it's not this pure free market success story some make it out to be. It never is, really.

 

[Bootstoots]

Uber is a payment and customer connection service for unregistered cabs, which were formerly illegal. I am sort of surprised that they were allowed to just ignore all relevant laws and proceed anyway. I think it came down to three things:

1. It benefits the urban middle class, which has lots of political capital.
2. The group that loses out is working class and largely immigrant. They have little political capital.
3. Everybody seems to regard high-tech things (especially smartphone apps) in a weirdly overhyped way, even if they're really providing services like unregistered cabs that are decidedly not high-tech.

I would agree that taxi services before were unnecessarily overregulated, in ways that disadvantaged consumers. But I'm not a huge fan of allowing high-tech services to just ignore laws either.

 

[hobbsyoyo]

A summary, OK, The Dutch first developed it, the British followed suit and we Americans adopted it in 1945.

As for Liberal Capitalism https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economic_liberalism

Or you could just ignore it as I expect most will do.

This is an interesting topic and not one that I would ignore.

But I'm not watching a goddamn video and copypasta of someone else's words.

Why don't you tell me what this thread is about?

Here's a hint: your summary here sucks even worse than the OP.

 

[illram]

Uber is a payment and customer connection service for unregistered cabs, which were formerly illegal. I am sort of surprised that they were allowed to just ignore all relevant laws and proceed anyway. I think it came down to three things:

1. It benefits the urban middle class, which has lots of political capital.
2. The group that loses out is working class and largely immigrant. They have little political capital.
3. Everybody seems to regard high-tech things (especially smartphone apps) in a weirdly overhyped way, even if they're really providing services like unregistered cabs that are decidedly not high-tech.

I would agree that taxi services before were unnecessarily overregulated, in ways that disadvantaged consumers. But I'm not a huge fan of allowing high-tech services to just ignore laws either.

Airbnb enjoyed a similar rise in popularity as a "startup..." that was doing the same thing VRBO had been doing for over a decade. But they put a nice tech sheen on it so now Airbnb is synonymous with vacation rentals even though they really aren't doing anything new.

 

[abradley]

This is an interesting topic and not one that I would ignore.

But I'm not watching a goddamn video and copypasta of someone else's words.

Why don't you tell me what this thread is about?

Here's a hint: your summary here sucks even worse than the OP.

Now you've hurt my feelings, too busy pouting for anything else.

 

[aelf]

The "protestant work ethic" did not create capitalism, but Calvinism did provide a religious justification for capitalism by divorcing Christianity from ethics and introducing predestinatination. An insidious, self-serving doctrine that frees the upper classes from all responsibility and justifies any injustice.

I don't think you can lay that on Calvinism's feet. Wasn't Calvin and his rule notoriously austere? Makes about as much sense as holding Wahhabism responsible for the Saudi royals' excess.

Maybe we could blame the Dutch for the association. They were the greediest Calvinists I can think of, and they were very greedy!

In any case, have you seen modern-day Evangelicalism? At least previously Christians had to have some kind of rationalisation. These days, it's a straight up transaction: Be faithful and you'll be rich and successful!

 

[warpus]

So I agree Uber is more convenient and it has also spurred cabbies do up their game, i.e. no more claiming the credit card machine doesn't work, no more claiming their shift is over when I tell them I want to go somewhere inconvenient, etc.

One of the problems with taxis is that they are still doing all of this, including in markets where Uber is operating. In Toronto at least cabbies, instead of improving their services and/or lowering their prices, have resorted to blocking streets and holding protests instead, not to mention actually going out of their way to physically assault uber drivers.

I would love to see taxi companies up their game to compete with Uber, but I haven't seen any signs of that, aside from the Beck taxi company in Toronto coming out with a decent Uber-like app. It really seems that cabbies never had to have good PR, so they are just completely lost here and have no idea what to do. And that to me is a sign that their business model is so flawed it might as well crash and burn.

That's nice for me. But, we got here by Uber and others exploiting the current system.

I realize that this isn't way capitalism is supposed to work exactly, but provide a crappy service and overcharge for it, and somebody might just step up to price you out of the market. If our governments and the taxi companies themselves couldn't have been bothered to try to improve the system, then I don't mind at all that somebody else stepped in and did it for them, even if they broke some laws in the process.

 

[Hygro]

I think it's awesome when loopholes, consumer super-satisfaction, and fast-paced tech growth rekts old industries.

I just wish governments would respond by cashing out the old guys they swore to protect. For example: cities should buy back taxi medallions.

 

[Arwon]

It is worth pointing out that Uber has been running a very fine line due to their lack of liability insurance that traditional taxi companies need to have. There are, you know, reasons taxi companies need liability insurance and Uber pretending it doesn't because it is "just connecting people" is going to fall apart in the face of a good lawsuit.

I'm all in favor of wrecking taxi companies monopolies on taxi medallions but taking advantage of loopholes that exist because the business concept didn't exist when the laws were written isn't particularly sustainable or a desirable direction for start-ups to take.

they were pre-emptively legalised in my territory with new regulations and changes for the taxi industry. Seems like a decent response.