- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
Uber and Lyft Are The Arguments to turn (Social) Liberals to Libertarians
Posted on 8/2/14 at 9:42 am
Posted on 8/2/14 at 9:42 am
i was listening to a podcast earlier this week about the "sharing" economy, mostly dealing with the effects of uber/lyft on the price of taxi medallions. medallions were previously one of the best investments on earth, and a function of nothing more than local crony capitalism (create a cartel by limiting, legally, the number of market participants)
the rise in popularity of the "ride sharing" apps like uber and lyft are eroding the price of these medallions, because the market is speaking and market participants like the innovation (and potential savings) of the new tech. what are local governments doing? using the power of the state to criminalize this behavior in order to protect the cartels
this is a real world, plain view example of the argument of libertarians relating to how we deal with government infringing on our property rights as well as corruption in government. this sort of injustice will only exist IF we allow government to have the power. want to reduce corruption? reduce the power of that government position as well as the amount of money it can spend. who will bribe that person? kill the head and the body will die.
also, remember, this government protection of cartels benefits the rich. sure, the face of the argument for market protection (they took our jobs!) will be the poor drivers, but they are not the ones purchasing the medallions that are worth 7-figures. the "labor" argument is a hollow one, and it is ironic that those who claim to represent the workers are really defending management.
also, uber/lyft are "real world" examples, but with the "sharing economy" and the proliferation of communication and information exchanges via the internet and mobile technology, it's the tip of the ice berg. if you think about how this sort of tech, as well as other developments in tech may occur, society may change. the efficiency of society may evolve in ways even my generation can't truly imagine.
there are aps to share parking spaces right now. you signal when you're leaving, another person "buys" that spot's rights, and that's that. this tech is really limited to bigger cities on the west coast and it's just in its infancy, but this will REALLY change the urban lifestyle.
with self-driving cars, we won't even need taxi drivers, truck drivers for cargo, or hell, individual car ownership. down the road, we'll arrange a car to pick us up, drop us off, and then when we need another ride, do the same. hell this will make even the parking aps obsolete. you watch...government will do its best to make driverless cars illegal (we're talking 10M+ jobs lost at least...probably more when you discuss the industry of selling cars itself)
hell, houses may become an outdated concept. sharing living spaces (like we do with cars) will allow for a completely mobile lifestyle
the only thing (within expected reason) that can slow or prevent this progress, is government
the rise in popularity of the "ride sharing" apps like uber and lyft are eroding the price of these medallions, because the market is speaking and market participants like the innovation (and potential savings) of the new tech. what are local governments doing? using the power of the state to criminalize this behavior in order to protect the cartels
this is a real world, plain view example of the argument of libertarians relating to how we deal with government infringing on our property rights as well as corruption in government. this sort of injustice will only exist IF we allow government to have the power. want to reduce corruption? reduce the power of that government position as well as the amount of money it can spend. who will bribe that person? kill the head and the body will die.
also, remember, this government protection of cartels benefits the rich. sure, the face of the argument for market protection (they took our jobs!) will be the poor drivers, but they are not the ones purchasing the medallions that are worth 7-figures. the "labor" argument is a hollow one, and it is ironic that those who claim to represent the workers are really defending management.
also, uber/lyft are "real world" examples, but with the "sharing economy" and the proliferation of communication and information exchanges via the internet and mobile technology, it's the tip of the ice berg. if you think about how this sort of tech, as well as other developments in tech may occur, society may change. the efficiency of society may evolve in ways even my generation can't truly imagine.
there are aps to share parking spaces right now. you signal when you're leaving, another person "buys" that spot's rights, and that's that. this tech is really limited to bigger cities on the west coast and it's just in its infancy, but this will REALLY change the urban lifestyle.
with self-driving cars, we won't even need taxi drivers, truck drivers for cargo, or hell, individual car ownership. down the road, we'll arrange a car to pick us up, drop us off, and then when we need another ride, do the same. hell this will make even the parking aps obsolete. you watch...government will do its best to make driverless cars illegal (we're talking 10M+ jobs lost at least...probably more when you discuss the industry of selling cars itself)
hell, houses may become an outdated concept. sharing living spaces (like we do with cars) will allow for a completely mobile lifestyle
the only thing (within expected reason) that can slow or prevent this progress, is government
Posted on 8/2/14 at 10:11 am to SlowFlowPro
quote:
hell, houses may become an outdated concept. sharing living spaces (like we do with cars) will allow for a completely mobile lifestyle
Like hotels? Or sites like vrbo?
Posted on 8/2/14 at 10:24 am to HurricaneDunc
quote:
Like hotels?
this is more long-term, and even in hotels, you're usually not using the room but for maybe 1/2 the day
quote:
Or sites like vrbo?
an ancient version of the sharing economy
Posted on 8/2/14 at 10:25 am to HurricaneDunc
quote:
Or sites like vrbo?
I think New Orleans has laws against homeowners doing short term rentals, especially during Mardi Gras.
Think about that, the city is protecting the hotel cartel from OWNER's who wish to exercise their property rights.
Posted on 8/2/14 at 10:26 am to Semaphore
quote:
Think about that, the city is protecting the hotel cartel from OWNER's who wish to exercise their property rights.
yup
Posted on 8/2/14 at 10:30 am to SlowFlowPro
quote:
the only thing (within expected reason) that can slow or prevent this progress, is government
I think this will be exponentially more the case anytime technology encroaches on the turf of any entity that has a significant unionized component.
It has always been true as powerful people feeling their business model being threatened by technology would turn to their friends in the government to save them, but it is going to be that 1000xs when there is a union component.
Posted on 8/2/14 at 10:31 am to Semaphore
Why should I be subject to some a-hole renting out his house next door to a bunch of miscreants for Mardi Gras. This has nothing to do with the "hotel cartel".
Posted on 8/2/14 at 10:33 am to OleWar
quote:
This has nothing to do with the "hotel cartel".
actually that is. it's a perfect example of what i'm talking about (it's just kind of idiosyncratic to nola)
i'm pretty sure the city said this law was there to protect the hotel industry
quote:
Why should I be subject to some a-hole renting out his house next door to a bunch of miscreants for Mardi Gras.
why do you have a right to tell him what he's doing with his property?
if those "miscreants" are breaking the law, call the cops...same as if any existential beings are in that house
Posted on 8/2/14 at 10:36 am to OleWar
quote:
Why should I be subject to some a-hole renting out his house next door to a bunch of miscreants for Mardi Gras. This has nothing to do with the "hotel cartel".
Government protecting your sensibilities?
Posted on 8/2/14 at 10:38 am to SlowFlowPro
With zoning laws, I have the ability to know I generally don't have to call the cops every single day or more during carnival. If the house or neighborhood is zoned residential, it is not a commercial property.
Posted on 8/2/14 at 10:40 am to RogerTheShrubber
Yes the purpose of local government is to reflect the sensibilities of the local community.
Posted on 8/2/14 at 10:43 am to OleWar
quote:
With zoning laws, I have the ability to know I generally don't have to call the cops every single day or more during carnival.
this is hilarious. you live in a place that celebrates debauchery of "carnival" but you want to be insulated from that
quote:
If the house or neighborhood is zoned residential, it is not a commercial property.
but this isn't really a "commercial" property. the main purpose of the property is residential. its use is must efficiently maximized at certain points (the minority, in this case).
and, again, you're trying to limit a person's dominion over his property (1) for completely selfish reasons and (2) because there may be a disruption, in the middle of a city-wide party, and you don't want to have to call the cops
do i get to tell you how to use your property to, for an event that may annoy me (while i ignore my avenue to directly address the problem IF it may arise in the future)?
Posted on 8/2/14 at 10:44 am to OleWar
quote:
Yes the purpose of local government is to reflect the sensibilities of the local community.
oh so a month when a city is having a massive fricking month-long alcohol-infused sex romp...with parades shutting down large sections of the city constantly WHILE hosting hundreds of thousands of visitors, you're claiming that the "sensibilities" of the city do not include hosting extra people outside of hotels?
makes sense
Posted on 8/2/14 at 10:46 am to OleWar
quote:
Yes the purpose of local government is to reflect the sensibilities of the local community.
Yours may not be predominant.
Posted on 8/2/14 at 10:47 am to SlowFlowPro
quote:
oh so a month when a city is having a massive fricking month-long alcohol-infused sex romp...with parades shutting down large sections of the city constantly WHILE hosting hundreds of thousands of visitors, you're claiming that the "sensibilities" of the city do not include hosting extra people outside of hotels?
Exactly
Posted on 8/2/14 at 10:47 am to RogerTheShrubber
it's the height of irony for a person to be complaining about hosting visitors of the city, while addressing sensibilities as the backbone of his point...in the context of MARDI GRAS
Posted on 8/2/14 at 10:50 am to SlowFlowPro
quote:
this is hilarious. you live in a place that celebrates debauchery of "carnival" but you want to be insulated from that
First, not every neighborhood in New Orleans celebrates carnival and certainly not in the same way. Parade routes are regulated, where alcohol can be served is regulated, pissing in public is illegal, where one shows their genitalia is either frowned upon or accepted in certain parts of the city during festivities.
quote:
do i get to tell you how to use your property to, for an event that may annoy me (while i ignore my avenue to directly address the problem IF it may arise in the future)?
Not you, but the community. This is how society works.
Posted on 8/2/14 at 10:51 am to SlowFlowPro
Lewis Hyde talks about some ideas like the sharing economy, which he calls the gift economy. I'm not sure I see the housing argument you are making, but what you also hint at is the massive seachange that is coming with employment. I can't see how the future technological society cannot live without a negative income tax. That might send the conservatives into a frenzy, but I think it is the future.
Posted on 8/2/14 at 10:51 am to SlowFlowPro
quote:
it's the height of irony for a person to be complaining about hosting visitors of the city, while addressing sensibilities as the backbone of his point...in the context of MARDI GRAS
Right.
Wonder if he wants to limit the number of visitors his neighbor can have? Or house sitters? They may not share the same sensibilities, after all.
This post was edited on 8/2/14 at 10:53 am
Posted on 8/2/14 at 10:55 am to crazy4lsu
quote:
I can't see how the future technological society cannot live without a negative income tax
or a min income
but there is also always emigration. if you can't survive in the modern economy, kindly gtfo
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News