"Back in October, the French government mentioned this piece of legislation as these new services would hurt traditional cab drivers."
So? That's how the market and progress works. If a service can't stand up on it's own, it doesn't need to exist.
So? That's how the market and progress works. If a service can't stand up on it's own, it doesn't need to exist.
A single NYC taxi medallion goes for millions of dollars: http://www.nyc.gov/html/tlc/html/about/average_medallion_pri...
Most Taxi drivers have to rent one; which is not cheap. The medallion owners get to sit on their asses in rake in the cash.
Your concern is misplaced.
That said... the Uber black car drivers are licensed, only as private limo drivers rather than taxi drivers. They're not allowed to accept street hails. (Before smartphones, this meant having an advance reservation in place.) They're perfectly qualified to drive passengers.
And unlike most regular taxis I've experienced in the SF bay, Uber drivers aren't on their cell phone during the entire drive, so they're arguably safer drivers.
You might have a point when different industries with different built-in subsidies compete (taxis vs. buses or trains vs. planes). That's not the case here.
Ask the people who were priced out of transportation due to surge pricing what they think of the situation. Now imagine if Uber had driven all regulated taxis out of business and people were forced to pay exorbitant surge-pricing fees.
I'm not really against Uber or this strategy, but the "market" doesn't always sort things out fairly.