> Bell System ended up being heavily regulated, and it's service was second to none. It was nearly a natural monopoly because of the cost of running phone lines. If Uber ever became that, we could resolve any problems with regulation.
I think it's unlikely that the current political climate will allow such problems to be solved with regulation.
At this exact moment? No. But if Uber was really gouging people Trump would be one of the first to try to make political capital from regulating them.
Politics is politics. I was just re-listening to Dan Carlin's podcast series on the fall of Rome. He starts with the Graccus brothers, who were populists. Rome had an elitist power structure, basically the founding families controlled the senate, with the Equestrians and Plebes below them (and slaves below that).
The Graccus brothers got themselves elected Tribunes, which were roles intended to check the power of the senate, and took those roles to push forward land and other reforms to check the power of the senate and give things to the middle class and poor (some would say to buy the mob).
To stop this, the Senate at one point recruited their own Tribune candidate, and he didn't promise to rollback the Graccus reforms, in fact he did the opposite. Instead of giving away land for cheap prices to the Plebes, he offered them free land. He offered even more bread subsidies, and instead of the state paying for a foreign colony for the plebes, he offered to pay for 12 of them. And he got elected to replace Gaius Gracchus.
All politicians are sensitive to where the wind is blowing and most try to take advantage from it.
I think it's unlikely that the current political climate will allow such problems to be solved with regulation.