[rodgerd]

And yet in New Zealand, Uber is instructing its drivers to ignore the legal requirements for commercial passenger transport, which boil down to a background check, a license endorsement, and a more frequent warrent of fitness check.

Uber is opposed in principle to even the most minimal safety legislation.

[yummyfajitas]

Of course they are opposed. Uber demonstrates that regulation is unnecessary and generally harmful, and typically only exists to rip off consumers.

Taxi regulations typically limit supply (raising costs for consumers), protect drivers over passengers (in Vegas a complaint against drivers must be notarized), and protect favored ethnic groups (c.f. Shiv Sena's taxi law in Maharashtra). Can you name any contemporary real life problem that taxi regulators solve better than Uber's own regulators?

I'm aware that historically, taxi regulation purports to solve real problems. But I claim that in the modern economy, Uber has solved every single one of those problems better than regulators can.

Of all the cities I'm familiar with (NYC, Vegas, Chicago, Mumbai, Delhi, Pune, Bangalore, Kuala Lumpur), I can't think of a single instance where a regulated taxi gave me better consumer protections than Uber/Lift/Ola.

So again, the simple question: what problems that currently exist would regulation solve?

[rodgerd]

> Uber demonstrates that regulation is unnecessary and generally harmful, and typically only exists to rip off consumers.

And then to "prove" your point you completely ignore the case I discussed, presumably because it doesn't fit your pre-canned rant which would look more at home, frankly, on /r/hailcorporate.

> So again, the simple question: what problems that currently exist would regulation solve?

The one where I'd like to have a commercial driver held to the standard of passing a police background check, a heightened demonstration of driving competence, and a properly maintained vehicle, none of which I see any evidence of Uber particularly caring about.

Or the one where they appear to be criminal fraudsters? http://arstechnica.co.uk/tech-policy/2016/06/uber-hired-inve...

[yummyfajitas]

Here's evidence that Uber cares about all those things in New Zealand:

http://auckland.ubermovement.com/uberx/

http://auckland.ubermovement.com/required-documents/

It looks as if your proposed regulation is not solving a real problem. Personal attacks don't change this.

I'm all in favor of regulation where it makes sense. If there's a problem that can demonstrably solved by regulation, I'm all in favor of it. But this hardly seems to be one of those situations.

[sokoloff]

Where are these places where taxi drivers have a heightened demonstration of driving competence and vehicles better maintained than Ubers?

Around here (metro Boston), I can be virtually certain that the cab will have at least warning light on the dash, have wheel bearings that audibly rattle, and the driver doesn't strike me as someone who has gone to extensive training nor seem to have a superior awareness of the traffic laws nor common traffic courtesies.

[MarkMc]

Sure, Uber demonstrates that regulation is generally harmful and typically rips off consumers, but doesn't that still allow a few worthy regulations. Say, drivers cannot have a recent conviction for a violent offence?

[yummyfajitas]

Uber and Lyft already require this in the US, according to a quick google search.

http://www.idrivewithuber.com/uber-driver-requirements/ https://help.lyft.com/hc/en-us/articles/213585758-Requiremen...

In India, Uber now imposes a background check that drastically exceeds the regulatory minimum (police-issued "character certificate", approx an 8k bribe).

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2014-12-09/uber-drive...

Sounds like criminals driving cars isn't currently a problem in the US. In India, it's a problem that regulators don't solve but Uber does.

So again, what problems that currently exist would regulation solve?

[yjnut]

It is outrageously silly to compare Uber's self-regulation in an environment where it is surrounded by the constant threat of more intrusive government regulation; to it's hypothetical behavior in a hypothetical world where government regulation was not on the table.

One of the MAJOR positive spillover effects from government regulation is that companies self-police themselves more effectively, as part of their attempt to make sure they remain officially unregulated.

[yummyfajitas]

You could be right. Maybe the optimal policy would be for politicians to rattle their sabre in Uber's general direction while doing nothing.

[cmarschner]

Not sure if I understand your point. Unregulated taxi is a perfect market. What does this mean? No profit for the drivers. So what has happened over the last hundred years? Right, lobbying for market controls so that drivers can keep a part of the profits. Guess what will happen with Uber...!