> So why should taxi drivers have to get "licensed"? What exactly is that license? What does it represent besides going through a burdensome ordeal? How would getting licensed increase safety in any way? It's not like anyone wants to experience a car crash.

All businesses must be licenced. Taxi licensing is special because of their special circumstance. They conduct their business primarily on public streets, and without licensing to ensure fair pricing and service to clientele they may:

(a) 'forget' about picking up people of a certain skin color (b) refuse fare to a certain district they don't like (c) arbitrarily set fares depending on what they see as people's willingness to pay--like say setting the fare for single women outside nightclubs to 3x the normal rate.

All of these things I've seen in unregulated environments and to a lesser extent (a & b ) in regulated environments too.

You're seeing problems that aren't really there.

> All businesses must be licenced.

Why? Why the hell would a grocery store need a license and what for? I'm not asking for "because the government says so", because the government says a lot of things that don't actually make sense. Is there a good, objective reason for all businesses to have to be licensed and how would the license help?

> Taxi licensing is special because of their special circumstance.

What does that mean? What are the special circumstances? It's just people with cars and people who need to go places.

> (a) 'forget' about picking up people of a certain skin color

Suppose there was no regulation for taxis. Now suppose a big taxi company had emerged. Let's call it "Toober". Now Toober, just like most companies, wants to make as much money as possible.

Do you think people accusing its drivers of racism would be conducive to that goal, and if not, do you think Toober would do something about racist drivers?

What about the drivers? They want money too, right? So if there was a racist driver working for Toober, and he knew Toober doesn't tolerate racism because it's bad for their image and thus, bottom line, don't you think the driver would refrain from behaving in a racist way so that he could keep his job?

> (b) refuse fare to a certain district they don't like

Don't like? Because it somehow displeases them like Justin Bieber's music displeases a lot of guys? What sense would it make for a taxi to leave money on the table because he finds a district distasteful?

> (c) arbitrarily set fares depending on what they see as people's willingness to pay--like say setting the fare for single women outside nightclubs to 3x the normal rate.

Again, imagine Toober getting complaints about discrimination. On the other hand, getting home safely from a night out is a more valuable service than just getting from Place A to B in less dangerous situation, so maybe it's alright to charge a bit more.

Sure, three times the normal rate would be too much, but another taxi company would be free to offer a better rate, and people would take it.

Do you see why regulation is not necessary at all? Whenever the government says it's doing something for your safety or for fairness, you can be 100% sure the results and real reasons are different.

The real reason why we have taxi regulations is to maintain a state-supported taxi-cartel.

In the UK the Black Cab drivers have special rights. E.g. they are allowed to stop on cycle lanes, hairpin corners, etc. They are allowed to use engines which has 3x more emissions than a VW Golf 1.6TDI.

So they are licenced to serve the selfish customers who don't care whether they endanger others with hailing a taxi at a place they should not and they don't care others who have to inhale the fumes.

The logic for street hails is that it's fundamentally impossible to negotiate prices or quality of service ahead of time. Enforcing a uniform price & service standard lends predictability to the procedure.

Impossible?

    - How much for taking me from here to <Place X>?
    - That would be $40.
    - Alright, let's go.

Quality of service would involve various things, but there could be a big taxi company called Toober, for example, with a good reputation, so you could reasonably expect to receive at least decent service from their drivers, and there would be no problem.

If you were feeling more adventurous, you could opt for a small(er) provider without an established reputation, but it would cost a bit less than Toober. Most likely, there would be no problem.

As a sidenote, whoever downvoted this and the other related post is allergic to thinking.

Please don't post comments like this, which break the site guidelines.

https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

Well, the real problem here is inane downvotes, not that I pointed it out.