Skip to main content

Pro-Uber Cosmic Debris

Depending on where you are situated, at any given time, the insights you can gain from observing the political process can be amazing.

Consider Mayor Fred Eisenberger's claim, as reported several times on CHML the other day, that Hamilton's taxi industry "backs" the new amendments to the taxi bylaw, which exempt the Uber taxi company from almost all of the restrictions that are imposed upon the other two taxi companies in Hamilton.

As a member of Hamilton's taxi industry, I must admit that Fred Eisenberger's announcement came as quite a surprise to me because, frankly, my casual surveys of Hamilton cab drivers reveal that almost *NONE* of them "back" the idea of a two-tiered taxi regulatory regime.

Who, in the Hamilton taxi industry *would* back the idea that:

1 - they will still be forced to pay $100 a year to the City for a cab driver's license, while Uber cabbies pay nothing?

2 - that non-Uber cab drivers will still be required to piss their money away on a ridiculous cab driver training program, while Uber cabbies will be exempt?

3 - that Uber cab owners will only require a Safety Standards Certificate while, while non-exempt cab owners will still require a Safety Standards Certificate PLUS a redundant inspection at a City of Hamilton taxi inspection station, manned by a government employee, who's job security rests upon always finding *something wrong* with the cab that the Safety Standards Certificate missed?

4 - that non-exempt taxi operators must comply with the mandate that taxi transportation for the disabled is a "fundamental human right," regardless of how much of a burden it imposes upon certain taxi owners, while Uber cab owners are exempt from the same obligation?

5 - that, in order to have permission to make a living in the City of Hamilton, as cab operators, non-exempt cab owners must each pay about $600 a year (times 447 cabs) equals about $270,000 per year, at the same time as Uber taxi is given the right to operate an unlimited number of taxis for a flat fee of $60,000?

6 - that non-exempt taxi operators must install expensive cameras to monitor the goings on in their cabs, while Uber cab owners are exempt, on the ridiculous grounds that Uber lacks payment flexibility, and only serves customers who can qualify for credit card accounts? (Which rules out many of Hamilton's citizens, you know... like the poor, the unemployed, the mentally ill, the panhandlers, the Syrian refugees... you know... the people the politicians pretend to *care so much about?*) 

What else?

Oh yeah. The amended taxi bylaw will ban the use of ex-cop cars for use as taxicabs. But, unless I am wrong, this will only apply to non-Uber taxis. As more and more Uber cabbies realize they are being financially skinned alive by Uber's ridiculous %25 income tax on their earnings, more and more of them will discover why non-Uber taxi operators have opted to employ used cop cars for, at least, the last fifty years.

According to information I have received recently, the use of ex-cop cars for Ubering has already been adopted in the city of Chicago.

Go figger!

Given what I have written above, do you really think that the Hamilton taxi industry backs the new two-tiered Hamilton taxi bylaw?

Or do you think that Mayor Fred Eisenberger is full of excrement?

He could have showed some balls. Instead he chose to cave in to political expediency. The people are getting fed up with this endless charade of unprincipled leadership.

And please don't forget what these politicians promised you, all along, as they pretended to do all that was within their power to, "level the playing field," and compare that promise with my earlier prediction that, when a politician makes a bold statement about his fundamental convictions, take his words and reverse the meaning?

I ask you. Do you think Hamilton's new taxi bylaw levels the playing field?

--

How do I know that the people are finally getting fed up with this BS?

President Trump.

Please comment below.


Comments

  1. Fred said taxi industry, not taxi drivers. 'Industry' means company execs??

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. It could be the brokers, but they don't represent the taxi industry any more than the KKK represents the SPLC.

      Delete
  2. Frank Zappa was poisoned by the Illuminati.

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Please feel free to leave your comments, insults, or threats.

Popular posts from this blog

How to Save the Ontario Basic Income Program!Background Leftist Ontario virtue signallers have been freaking out over the Ford government's cancellation of the Basic Income free money project that was cooked up by the Wynne government to build up their voter base. I follow a few of these caring individuals on Twitter to study their self delusions. They've all been afflicted lately with Ford Derangement Syndrome, peacocking their indignation at the cancellation of Wynne's free money giveaway "program." But does the program really have to be cancelled? Of course not. All it would require to be saved is for the virtue signallers, and there are loads of them, from Deb Matthews and Andrea Horwath, to a parade of obscure, Twitter addicts, and their offended fans. The good news is that the program can easily continue on a voluntary basis. The only difference is that the leftists would have to reach into their own pockets to show how committed and compassionate they …
Poor Uber Driver Oh my. This is a sad story. Here is an Uber driver voicing his concerns in the Uber driver's forum about whether or not his "sharing economy" gig is paying off. It's possible that this is not a genuine post from a genuine Uber driver. I see that. It's the kind of schlopp I would write if I were in a mischievous mood. On the other hand, given what I already know about the Uber scam, and the people it exploits in order to get them to employ "assets they already own," in Tim Hudak's famous phrase, it's entirely reasonable to believe that this is a REAL Uber driver, who is just beginning to figure out who is making money, or should be making money, and who is getting royally boned. (See my story about the Uber driver who drove a football player from Chicago to Buffalo for minus $38.50.) I knew it was a scam from the beginning. That is why, when people asked me why, instead of tolerating the City of Hamilton's demonstrably abs…
No Welfare for Immigrants:How to achieve unanimity in the Canadian Immigration debate Here's just a few, off the cuff, ideas for addressing most of the objections Canadian tax captives have about immigration. In Canada as it is set up now, only a fool can be in favour of open borders. As as libertarian, I remain 100% in favour of open borders, but only under certain conditions. The most important condition is that Canada be a free country. Since that is obviously not the case, I cannot support open borders at this time. Here are a few other conditions that, if met, would make me more agreeable to open borders, even without abolishing state education, government medical insurance, welfare, public pensions, the CBC, and so on, 1 - no welfare payments, especially child tax benefit payments, for immigrants for at least a period of time, say ten, or X, years. 2 - no free medicare for X years. (The word is that there are a lot of Pakistani MD's driving cabs. Restrictions on t…