[peter12]

The obvious rejoinder would be that you stick with the devil you know.

Uber is novel. It seems that there is some sort of wealth transfer from investors to consumers. For once in this economy, the little guy is actually getting a break. But don't kid yourself, Uber is subsidizing your $1, $24, $65 ride. That is how they break into new markets so quickly, crush the competition, and that is why they are losing so much money.

The question that reasonable people, and I think some of these people work in City Hall, are asking is what is the long game? Taxis have kind of worked for a long time. The economics of maintaining a semi-public good like a city livery service are complex, and it includes maintaining a standard of living for drivers, keep vehicles somewhat roadworthy, providing some choice for consumers, and providing a modicum of security through livery insurance.

Now, what is it that people hate about taxis, and what is it that they love about Uber?

- Well, they clearly hate dealing with drivers that are different than them. That is clear, and no matter how much people want to deny it, the cultural bias comes through pretty loud and clear. Most Uber drivers are university-educated, and come from a house with an excess vehicle. Ie. wealthier (maybe in the short-run) than your average cab driver.
- they clearly hate the state of most taxis. I believe average lifespan of a taxi is 4 years. You tell me what incentive a driver has to maintain his vehicle in perfect condition when it is treated basically like a public good by most passengers. No worse than a public good. It is a pure free-riding principle. People vomit, screw, and leave garbage in taxis. They do things in them that they wouldn't do on c-trains or buses. Uber is temporarily drawing on a fleet of mostly-new excess vehicles. These vehicles will be treated the same, and in a period of time, will suffer the same degradation in condition that all taxis face.
- People love the price of Uber vs taxis. Well, Uber draws on a big pool of cars. They also have surge pricing, that while slimy, does encourage drivers to get out on the road during peak hours. Taxis limit the supply so they can guarantee their drivers some cash. Uber also subsidizes the price of the fare, and also imposes the entire cost of the ride onto the driver, especially the price of his labour. Analysis has shown that Uber drivers, no matter what people say early on, only do as well as the median taxi driver.

So to say that this is all due to a bunch of Northeastern Calgarians bribing City Councillors and the Mayor's office is total BS.