Hacker News Reader

Comment by Shivetya | Hacker News Reader

we already have enough hoops for companies to jump through to prevent competition so we certainly do not need any more. New York is a perfect example were regulation and so contorted the market you can make money selling your permission to run the business to the point it might be more profitable than running the business.

From medallions to food cart and restaurant permits, regulation is keeping competition out while rewarding those who merely sit on permits and rent their use. It is nearly an identical situation to how badly patents are managed and rewarded

View on HN

One of the reasons that taxis are licensed is that they're supposed to pick up everyone and anyone. Uber and Lyft don't seem to have that problem with race (AFAIK) but there are two other situations where people have trouble:

(1) small children, where you need a car seat (or two)

(2) people with disabilities - service animal, wheelchair, etc.

Analyzing the data would hopefully show whether people had to wait for 2 hours.

Also, as a substitute for race, it might be possible to see if certain areas are under-served or not served at all. Perhaps drivers are avoiding picking up in Harlem.

Anecdata: As a wheelchair user and frequent traveler, Uber has never ever failed me, but hailing a cab was nearly impossible (was, because at this point even if uber charged twice what a cab does, I'd still use them every time for the certainty that they'll pick me up).

"One of the reasons that taxis are licensed is that they're supposed to pick up everyone and anyone."

Which is clearly violated thousands of times per day. Sure you can call 311 in NYC but very few people do.

The difference is, the city has the authority to crack down on it. I was just in NYC, and cabs are running a video in the back seat informing passengers that it's illegal for cabs not to pick you up for race/disability. The city doesn't legally have that kind of leverage over Uber.

Leverage that is rarely and reluctantly used, and that no one reasonably expects to be used, and that does not translate into any observable consequences in the lives of black people attempting to get a ride.

I've once heard a quip that "You have no constitutional right to eat at a restaurant, but you do have one to a speedy trial -- but which one feels more secure?"

The city has "leverage" to stamp out discrimination against black people wanting a cab ride, but "no leverage" to stamp out discrimination against black people on Uber -- yet which one will more reliably secure a ride?

I watched that video, too, right after the first cab drove off when he found out where I was going to.

I could report him, but I'm a busy adult with kids of my own to mind, and I don't have time to try to parent someone else's problem.

So we shouldn't try to improve it?

Reply on news.ycombinator.com