If there was a problem, increasing the number of medallions and scheduling surge pricing (like NYC has done with all cars now) would have improved service.

So.. would NYC have done this if it wasn't influenced by the existence of Uber/Lyft?

Would the taxi companies that owned all the medallions have allowed this to happen if their existence wasn't threatened? Or would they lobby to stop this at all cost because it doesn't benefit them?

I guess since flying is a hassle, I should buy a jet and land it in parking lots to make it convenient for consumers. So what if a few hundred die a year if tens of thousands have easier air travel.

So hundreds are dying due to Uber?

If you need to make a bullshit theoretical to justify your stance, you might want to reconsider your stance.

If flying cars were possible and if benefited consumers, it should definitely be adopted and regulated properly like any other service.

[–] Blue_Morpho@lemmy.world 1 points 14 hours ago

Would the taxi companies that owned all the medallions have allowed this to happen if their existence wasn't threatened? Or would they lobby to stop this at all cost because it doesn't benefit them?

No taxi lobby stopped Uber.

So hundreds are dying due to Uber?

There is a sexual assault every 8 minutes caused by an Uber driver.

Googling says for example Uber has 400 assaults in San Francisco and the taxi industry had 14.

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/01/07/us/uber-driver-murder-trial.html#%3A%7E%3Atext=Former+Uber+Driver+Pleads+Guilty%2CU.S.

I can't find any examples of taxi drivers murdering their passengers. All news is about taxi drivers being murdered by their customers.