Skip to main content

OMG! This is so Uberish.

As I read the article (see link below,) I could not help but recall the targeting, and eventual closure of Jaspal Gill's taxi fleet back in the fall of 2015, and the suspension of his taxi driver's license, on the grounds that his operation was not in compliance with City of Hamilton bylaws.

The message sent to Jaspal Gill was unambiguous. If you disregard the City of Hamilton's taxi regulations, you will be dealt with with the full force of the law. When it comes to taxicab regulation, the position of the City of Hamilton is zero tolerance for non-compliance.

Unless you are Uber.

The decision echoed the result of the attempts by Bruce Bergez to Uberize the optometry business.

Justice Watt, writing for the Court of Appeal, succinctly stated, "We cannot suffer the sacrifice of the rule of law to the lure of lucre."

Yep. That good ol' Rule of Law.

At around the same time as Mr. Gill's business was being decimated by the sincere devotees of the rule of law doctrine espoused by Justice Watt, the U.S. based taxi company, Uber, announced its intention to start operating a taxi service in Hamilton in total defiance of the existing laws.

The main difference between Mr. Bergez and Uber, it turned out, was the amount of lucre the respective parties were able to assemble in order to challenge the rule of law. Uber had billions of dollars behind it. The rule of law folded like a defective lawn chair. The lure of lucre prevailed. In Canada, the law could be purchased. Justice Watt's declaration ended up being exposed as pure wind.

Unlike Mr. Gill, who was severely dealt with by Hamilton's heroic politicians, Uber was not only given a pass on its 100% defiance of the taxi bylaws, the politicians scurried to invent a whole "new licensing category" that would give Uber's blatant disregard of the law an air of legitimacy. The effect of this "new licensing category" was not unlike a corporation initiating a stock split, only instead of issuing an equal number of certificates to the stock owners, the new certificates were given away to Uber for free. The market value of taxi owners licenses (stock certificates), predictably, tumbled from about $200 k, to an estimated $50 k, or less. Some stock split.

Most of the victims of this financial crime are too unsophisticated to understand what happened to their life-time investments. Some even believe the collapse was due to "market forces." Or, "disruptive technology." Anyone who even remotely grasps political economy knows this to be pure nonsense. The collapse in license values was 100% due to "political forces." The market had fuck all to do with it.

The rule of law, it turns out, has no more value than the word of a politician.

What Justice Watt should have said was,

Justice Watt, writing for the Court of Appeal, succinctly stated, "We cannot suffer the sacrifice of the rule of law to the lure of insufficient lucre."

The final outcome?

Uber Inc. will continue to harvest about 25% of the taxi market for deposit in its tax friendly Dutch banks.

The politicians will continue to collect their salaries, and probably get re-elected since the small minority of individuals they have sacrificed have no political power, nor public sympathy.

And the flood of new drivers into the taxi market will, predictably, drive incomes down to third world levels.

We now find ourselves in a situation where the City of Hamilton is flooded with taxi drivers, each vying for a piece of the passenger pie.

With statutory minimum wages set to rise in Ontario, this price barrier to employment will lead to even more thirsty camels being driven to the taxi driver watering hole in search of survival. Taxi driver wages will decline even further.

Finally, we have this report out of Singapore that makes Jaspal Gill's "crimes" of malfunctioning security cameras, and shifter cables secured with shoelaces, look like schoolyard pranks compared to Uber's clear preference for lucre over safety:

Smoke, Then Fire: Uber Knowingly Leased Unsafe Cars to Drivers


On another issue when it comes to the rule of law. What, exactly, is legal these days?

As the Uber phenomenon aptly demonstrates, the law has become oozingly fluid. Hillary continues to get away with a string of egregious crimes while the establishment swamp, more like cesspool, continues to dig for some pretense to remove the duly elected president of the United States.

Will the newly announced grand jury find something in Trump's history that was illegal? It's a mathematical certainty.

"In his new book, the Boston-based civil liberties advocate and occasional Reason contributor Harvey Silverglate estimates that in 2009, the average American commits about three federal felonies per day. And yet, we aren’t a nation of degenerates. On the contrary, most social indicators have been moving in a positive direction for a generation. Silverglate argues we're committing these crimes unwittingly. The federal criminal code has become so vast and open to interpretation, Silverglate argues, that a U.S. Attorney can find a way to charge just about anyone with violating federal law. In fact, it's nearly impossible for some business owners to comply with one federal regulation without violating another one. We're no longer governed by laws, we're governed by the whims of lawyers."

-- source


Myth-Busters: Reality Hits Minimum Wage Boosters

Comments

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 …
My Warning from an Uberpeople.net "Moderator." I just got a message from one of the moderators of the uberpeople.net Toronto driver's forum. In it he states, "This forum values opinions from all angles. However, being argumentative, name-calling, personal attacks, instigating other members, and any post that can be deemed confrontational will not be tolerated. Please refrain from any posts of this manner, even if instigated. We hope you can tone it back a bit going forward. Please review the terms and rules http://uberpeople.net/help/terms" I think he was feeling a bit humiliated after he read my criticism of his limp response to my "Uberpeople Service Animal Discussion" that I posted in the Toronto Uber taxi driver forum. Things have really changed in the last twenty-five years. It used to be quite the rollicking back and forth in discussion forums. Now, whenever you get the better of some smart-ass who takes shots at you, he threatens to have yo…

Hamilton's Check Engine Light Crisis and Other News

Unanimous Pro-Uber City Council Vote: The Damage "Check Engine Light" Crisis Uber MADDness Uber Hamilton by the Numbers Working with numbers can be a lot of fun. At least, I think so. I once took an in-house course, back when I had a real job, called "Strategies of Experimentation." I can't remember anything I learned in that course, but it made an impression on me that impacts my thinking to this day. It says that if you don't have solid data to work with, use the next best thing. Try to build a cloud of probability. Use whatever information you do have and think about whether it falls within the realm of reasonable expectation. The following analysis attempts to use this approach to some degree. What is known for sure is the approximate amount each taxi operator pays to the taxi broker for the service of matching riders with drivers - just like any other "technology company." That is $500 per month, per cab, or $6000 per year, per cab. With 44…