[fennecfoxen]

You are sticking it to a monstrous bogeyman, even as you use an entirely unethical, toxic company. The two things aren't mutually exclusive.

The NYC taxi cartel, in particular, which routinely sees all the consumer-protection parts of its regulations broken with zero consequence, deserves to die.

(By this I don't just mean the part which says the cab isn't allowed to ask you where you're going and refuse you a fare if you're inconvenient, or any petty act of casual racism through which they similarly refuse a fare, or just avoid certain neighbourhoods. I mean that I've had actual coworkers who were actually briefly kidnapped by someone who was driving the taxi illegally with someone else's license, which is utterly routine.)

[alphonsegaston]

Uber has all of those problems, but uses their mountain of VC cash to convince you they're exclusive to the taxi industry:

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2016-10-31/study-fin...

http://www.whosdrivingyou.org/rideshare-incidents#kidnapping...

http://www.whosdrivingyou.org/rideshare-incidents#Imposters

As you point out, a lack of consumer protections and appropriate policing is the cause of these problems. But they're endemic to this sector of the transportation industry, not taxi companies specifically. And Uber opposes these kind of protections anyway, so the idea that they're improving the situation is a joke.