[TeMPOraL]

Uber is generating consumer surplus by working illegally and disrupting the social trust that is the fabric of society. But whatever. I don't know much about Square, from what I've seem they do seem to be making big improvements in the space. But Uber doesn't do anything new - it's hardly even an iteration. They're just sexy, and created a worldwide brand. In Europe we had tons of local Ubers for years, and even dedicated services for markets like "not driving home drunk" popping up around periods when a lot of people drink (think Ne Year's Eve). The biggest value Uber is bringing is being centralized. A single brand. That has nothing to do with technology, and everything to do with business side.

[jdminhbg]

> Uber is generating consumer surplus by working illegally and disrupting the social trust that is the fabric of society.

The social trust and fabric of society stuff is kind of too funny to even lampoon, but the first half is important: if you can generate consumer surplus by breaking the law, what exactly does that say about the law, and on whose behalf it's working?

[TeMPOraL]

> The social trust and fabric of society stuff is kind of too funny to even lampoon*

It's funny because you probably grew up in a civilization and take it for granted.

> if you can generate consumer surplus by breaking the law, what exactly does that say about the law, and on whose behalf it's working?

It doesn't say anything. You can create consumer surplus breaking any law if you're willing to dump externalities elsewhere, on parties you don't count as consumers. A thief can for sure create consumer surplus by distributing stolen money among friends. So can the owner of a factory enrich the city by dumping toxic waste into a river, driving his costs down but poisoning people downstream.

[jdminhbg]

> It's funny because you probably grew up in a civilization and take it for granted

No, I'm pretty sure that the civilization I grew up in isn't predicated on taxi monopolies for existence.

> You can create consumer surplus breaking any law if you're willing to dump externalities elsewhere, on parties you don't count as consumers.

Go ahead and name the victims of these externalities, without counting the previous rent-seeking oligopoly Uber is displacing.

[TeMPOraL]

> No, I'm pretty sure that the civilization I grew up in isn't predicated on taxi monopolies for existence.

I didn't imply that. We must have misunderstood each other. So which of the following you disagree with:

- trust between people and organizations forms the fabric of society

- fabric of society is sort of important to a functioning society

- breaking the law and getting away with it damages the trust in the rule of law

> Go ahead and name the victims of these externalities, without counting the previous rent-seeking oligopoly Uber is displacing.

A lot of drivers and small companies which don't go around breaking laws for profit. Because that taxi market was all just "rent-seeking oligopoly" is bullshit. Sure, there were a lot of entrenched interests, but there were also a lot of others, some with very similar model to Uber, app included. Also consumers who depended on some unprofitable features of taxi networks that were forced by law in exchange for partial monopoly.

And if you go above just pure profit motive, then it's about society. About the very idea that you're to follow law when conducting your business, or else you'll face punishment. That there are rules to the game and that the government will enforce them successfully. Also, seeing how Uber is such an inspiration for startup world, don't you think we can expect more companies trying to ignore other laws as well? And not every ignored law will be the one you'd be happier without.