Lol. The bullies are out on the street with baseball bats swinging at all sorts of bad pitches.
Old statism versus new ideas. This is how I see this whole Uber v. Taxis "fight". Fight in quotations because unless the government goes full blown draconian mental cases and outlaw Uber (which has become a euphemism for all things modern at this point), it's a fight they will not win. It will be like Mike Tyson knocking out Michael Spinks.
Guess who plays the part of Tyson and who is cast as Spinks in this feature?
No contest because left to the market, consumers will choose Uber.
The key - the one ultimate key difference - that distinguishes Uber and Amazon (I'm waiting for the Quebec government to attack the Internet for all its Englishness) and all sorts of new companies is the service. Not the service they provide but the customer service experience.
They completely smash traditional businesses on this front. For example, Amazon will actually follow-up on issues related to your problem if you have one. Uber allows for drivers and customers to rate each other.
It's an instant activity.
You can't mistreat a customer on ebay or Amazon because your credibility is instantly affected by the community who review and rate you. Same with Uber.
But to statists and control freaks who are out of their minds and left field, this is an example of 'people making the wrong choice'. Just like how they decide to drink Dr. Pepper or eat at Wendy's. It shocks the Nanny-class. The mere fact they're even making an issue of this is a waste of time, money and energy.
It's irrational.
The two excuses they throw out are 'it's unfair' Uber doesn't pay for permits and is subjected to government regulations and the other questions its safety.
On the permit, has it occurred to anyone a permit scheme is a gateway to a monopoly? And when you have a monopoly you get no competition and little incentive to improve a product or service? The rise of Uber is directly connected to the fact Taxis were not sizing up the market well. They weren't because they didn't have to. Even if they noticed a possible niche to enter, there was no incentive to do so. Customers were at the mercy of Taxis.
With Uber this is no longer the case. Companies like Lyft and Uber wipe out the leverage held by Taxis and brings an equilibrium between customer and service. Not only that, can you imagine what will come out of the competition between Lyft and Uber? Now suddenly, you have competition and this can but be fantastic for users. Arguing otherwise is as futile as shadow boxing (or Quebec's tiresome fall back position of engaging in identity politics). Yes, I know the concept of shadow boxing is to 'fool' the boxer into thinking they can be faster than their shadow thus increasing speed. But for my purposes here, it's meant differently.
On regulations, again, this is not Uber's problem. Maybe the regulations are outdated and outmoded (as I think they are). No one should have to 'invest' $250 000 into a monopoly. Besides, this is all besides the point. It's not Uber that made things unfair. It's the government and cronies in the Taxi business. And all these protests - sometimes violent - are just confirming to be the end of the line is here.
Good riddance.
On safety, that's baseless and rooted in good old fashioned fear-mongering (not unlike the rubbish you see on climate change).
Uber and Lyft and other innovative companies have the parasite class scrambling to figure out ways to skim off them.
Uber, for example, probably knows the government is gonna get its cut - the mob always gets a piece of the action - and have likely factored this into their model.
I hope they can hold out because mobsters can get pretty vicious.
Old statism versus new ideas. This is how I see this whole Uber v. Taxis "fight". Fight in quotations because unless the government goes full blown draconian mental cases and outlaw Uber (which has become a euphemism for all things modern at this point), it's a fight they will not win. It will be like Mike Tyson knocking out Michael Spinks.
Guess who plays the part of Tyson and who is cast as Spinks in this feature?
No contest because left to the market, consumers will choose Uber.
The key - the one ultimate key difference - that distinguishes Uber and Amazon (I'm waiting for the Quebec government to attack the Internet for all its Englishness) and all sorts of new companies is the service. Not the service they provide but the customer service experience.
They completely smash traditional businesses on this front. For example, Amazon will actually follow-up on issues related to your problem if you have one. Uber allows for drivers and customers to rate each other.
It's an instant activity.
You can't mistreat a customer on ebay or Amazon because your credibility is instantly affected by the community who review and rate you. Same with Uber.
But to statists and control freaks who are out of their minds and left field, this is an example of 'people making the wrong choice'. Just like how they decide to drink Dr. Pepper or eat at Wendy's. It shocks the Nanny-class. The mere fact they're even making an issue of this is a waste of time, money and energy.
It's irrational.
The two excuses they throw out are 'it's unfair' Uber doesn't pay for permits and is subjected to government regulations and the other questions its safety.
On the permit, has it occurred to anyone a permit scheme is a gateway to a monopoly? And when you have a monopoly you get no competition and little incentive to improve a product or service? The rise of Uber is directly connected to the fact Taxis were not sizing up the market well. They weren't because they didn't have to. Even if they noticed a possible niche to enter, there was no incentive to do so. Customers were at the mercy of Taxis.
With Uber this is no longer the case. Companies like Lyft and Uber wipe out the leverage held by Taxis and brings an equilibrium between customer and service. Not only that, can you imagine what will come out of the competition between Lyft and Uber? Now suddenly, you have competition and this can but be fantastic for users. Arguing otherwise is as futile as shadow boxing (or Quebec's tiresome fall back position of engaging in identity politics). Yes, I know the concept of shadow boxing is to 'fool' the boxer into thinking they can be faster than their shadow thus increasing speed. But for my purposes here, it's meant differently.
On regulations, again, this is not Uber's problem. Maybe the regulations are outdated and outmoded (as I think they are). No one should have to 'invest' $250 000 into a monopoly. Besides, this is all besides the point. It's not Uber that made things unfair. It's the government and cronies in the Taxi business. And all these protests - sometimes violent - are just confirming to be the end of the line is here.
Good riddance.
On safety, that's baseless and rooted in good old fashioned fear-mongering (not unlike the rubbish you see on climate change).
Uber and Lyft and other innovative companies have the parasite class scrambling to figure out ways to skim off them.
Uber, for example, probably knows the government is gonna get its cut - the mob always gets a piece of the action - and have likely factored this into their model.
I hope they can hold out because mobsters can get pretty vicious.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Mysterious and anonymous comments as well as those laced with cyanide and ad hominen attacks will be deleted. Thank you for your attention, chumps.