[mulmen]

I think the social welfare math is more complicated than you suggest. The cab driver jobs saved may offset the inconvenience for example.

Certainly from a car-hailing-rider perspective the Uber wait is worse but social welfare is much more complex.

[ptmvp]

I agree it is more complicated than what I outlined above, but I do think the aggregate welfare lost from the detriment in service quality of car-hailing multiplied by the number of potential consumers hurt represents a bigger loss than any gain cab-drivers could obtain with this measure.

I find the measure exactly the wrong type of regulation, the one that hurts a large segment of society to protect a small group (which had already benefited from a decades-long state imposed monopoly and became stagnant and comformist as a result).

As a small disclaimer, I do admit I have a bias against cab-drivers in general, but I do not think it clouds my judgement in this case.

[mulmen]

I agree it is a bad form of regulation. Uber has benefits to consumers but it’s unclear to me what other benefits they offer to society as a whole.

The regulatory structures need to catch up but I don’t think Uber as it exists in 2019 is a viable long term solution.

[narag]

The cab driver jobs saved may offset the inconvenience for example.

On the contrary, the measure instantly caused the loss of thousands of jobs.