[dbt00]

Taxi licensing was not cronyism, it was simple economics. Taxicabs can either have x drivers all at a subsistence level, or 0.5x drivers with a reasonable standard of living. Licensing with a cap and fixed rates becomes a policy decision driven by the public interest.

[ryanwaggoner]

Why is this not true for every type of market? Taco stands, barbershops, web designers, attorneys, parking lots, dog walkers, etc? Couldn't you just replace "taxicabs" and "drivers" with any kind of business or industry?

Isn't the collective end goal of the competitive marketplace supposed to be razor thin margins due to competition? I live in NYC and prior to Uber, 1) taxi medallions were valued at high six figures, 2) service was terrible, 3) prices were too high, and 4) actual drivers still made shit money.

I think Uber and Lyft and others have improved all of that, to be honest. Competition is a beautiful thing.

[chrisco255]

That's ridiculous. $140K taxi medallions are simple economics? Each $140K a company had to pay for some stupid medallion could have employed two people for a year. Medallions and protectionism just created localized monopolies that had few incentives to improve service, innovate on tech, and even provide clean vehicles. There's no other industry that needs this artificial cap, as if demand and supply can be accurately controlled for by government policy officials. What a joke.