It seems to me that ridesharing services are an obvious win to everyone except taxi companies. They've lowered prices, improved service, and increased public safety. But a lot of leftists continue to attack them. Why? I submit it's because the ridesharing services have revealed that taxi regulations exist, not to protect public safety, but to prop up the taxi company profits, and protect them from competition.
If leftists concede that point for taxi regulations, what does that say about the rest of the regulatory state? Could it be that medical licensure serves primarily to protect the jobs of members of the medical cartel? That financial regulations serve primarily to protect the profits of financial service companies? The revealed perversity of taxi regulations calls into question the entire ideology of nanny state enthusiasts. Most leftists aren't willing to give up their ideology, so they attack the ridesharing services instead.
If leftists concede that point for taxi regulations, what does that say about the rest of the regulatory state? Could it be that medical licensure serves primarily to protect the jobs of members of the medical cartel? That financial regulations serve primarily to protect the profits of financial service companies? The revealed perversity of taxi regulations calls into question the entire ideology of nanny state enthusiasts. Most leftists aren't willing to give up their ideology, so they attack the ridesharing services instead.