|
|
|
|
|
by nostromo
2543 days ago
|
|
I think Uber vs the SF taxi commission is one such example. Regulations on taxis were sold as a public safety measure but the regulators became captured by the industry. Uber and Lyft sidestepped the regulations and prices went down, service improved dramatically, and there was no reduction in safety. (In fact, it’s likely drunk driving has gone down and improved public safety.) In this instance, private industry is currently a better regulator than the regulators were. |
|
Technically neither of those is a failure of regulation, those are side effects of regulation.
Uber and Lyft removed transparency of costs beyond knowing the cost of your trip for instance which isn't a benefit.
In fact I can't think of much that is related to regulation that they do better beyond being good enough for now by most metrics that people care about. Of course if that changes in the future nothing can be done.
I am fine with Uber and Lyft existing and I do agree that taxis had in some places made themselves into a nuisance but I don't know that those companies did a better job as much as they just ignored all those problems and assumed they weren't important.