[beagle3]

There is one more issue: Uber and Lyft massively increased supply. It is not clear, as you mention, whether this could have happened without investor aubsidy - but it is likely. Medallion allocation is a political subject which does not necessarily correlate with demand; and the established way medallion owners rent them out results in it being uneconomical for drivers to do more than a given amount of rides per shift - a result of which is that supply at peak demand (rainy days) is significantly lower than even what the medallion system allows for.

[x_throwaway80bf]

This isn't very relevant for discussions about NYC, since all drivers have to be licensed, and many drivers work for fleet owners who rent out the cars for shifts. Few (if any) NYC drivers user their personal vehicle, and it is very likely they lose money spending that time as drivers when they do.

So this issue is extremely complicated. Yes, medallion politics are inefficient. Are they as bad as overtly scammy practices to leverage up supply by exploiting poor economic judgement of the class of people who consider being an Uber driver?

Honestly, it's not clear to me, but certainly should not be seen as some type of free enterprise victory over the medallion system.