Why is the jitney illegal?

[phattonez]

Drivers don't inspect brakes. Most drivers pay a daily lease for their cabs -- even if their cab is in the shop for a half day getting fixed.

What kind of driver drives in a car himself that has bad brakes? Who would work for a company that would force him to drive a cab with brakes that could just stop working?

Meters can be gerry-rigged to run speedy. If they aren't regulated and meters aren't required to be checked and sealed, drivers will speed them up.

That's fraud. I never proposed that the government should not take action against that if it happens. But like I've said to you throughout this thread, where is the evidence that shows this to be a prevalent problem?

Tourists are at the mercy of cab drivers. They don't usually know what the fare should be. They're cheated by cab drivers all the time. In fact, unless one is a regular rider, not many people know what a cab fare should cost.

If it's not advantageous to them (cost vs. benefit) then they won't make a deal. There is no way around that. There is no should[/b] in prices. The right price for a consumer is the lowest he can find and the right price for a vendor is the highest price he can sell for. In the end, unless it is advantageous for both, a transaction will not happen.

Regulatory agencies give the consumer a place to go to mediate and complain, requiring accountability on the part of cab companies. They are cash businesses and, as such, are a breeding ground for corruption.

If there is fraud then go to a court. You don't need regulations upon regulations upon regulations.

 

[MaggieD]

What kind of driver drives in a car himself that has bad brakes? Who would work for a company that would force him to drive a cab with brakes that could just stop working?

A hungry one. A homeless one. A felon that can't find any other kind of job.

That's fraud. I never proposed that the government should not take action against that if it happens. But like I've said to you throughout this thread, where is the evidence that shows this to be a prevalent problem?

If an area has no formal regulation in place, there's no place to report it. The ADA isn't particularly interested in a guy who charges double the $10 fare. This is a prevalent problem in the Chicago suburbs as it is in other areas of the country -- even when there is regulation. Half Sigma: Cab drivers who cheat

If it's not advantageous to them (cost vs. benefit) then they won't make a deal. There is no way around that. There is no should[/b] in prices. The right price for a consumer is the lowest he can find and the right price for a vendor is the highest price he can sell for. In the end, unless it is advantageous for both, a transaction will not happen.

Cabbies rarely give up front prices unless it's to the airport. Tourists don't "shop price." They climb in a cab.

If there is fraud then go to a court. You don't need regulations upon regulations upon regulations.

Cab companies and their drivers should be regulated. Safey Inspection of Vehicle*Valid Driver's License*Proof of Insurance*Sealed Meter is hardly regulation-upon-regulation.

Go buy your $200 permit, for God's sake. Or go work for someone who has one.

 

[phattonez]

A hungry one. A homeless one. A felon that can't find any other kind of job.

Would kill himself? Because that's basically what it is.

If an area has no formal regulation in place, there's no place to report it. The ADA isn't particularly interested in a guy who charges double the $10 fare.

That's not fraud, that's not even unethical. People won't engage in the transaction unless it is beneficial to both parties.

This is a prevalent problem in the Chicago suburbs as it is in other areas of the country -- even when there is regulation. Half Sigma: Cab drivers who cheat

That's not cheating. That's just misunderstanding what prices actually are.

Cabbies rarely give up front prices unless it's to the airport. Tourists don't "shop price." They climb in a cab.

You're telling me that cabs don't show rates right on the car or have them listed somewhere?

Cab companies and their drivers should be regulated. Safey Inspection of Vehicle*Valid Driver's License*Proof of Insurance*Sealed Meter is hardly regulation-upon-regulation.

Safety inspection is unncessary.

Go buy your $200 permit, for God's sake. Or go work for someone who has one.

You are aware that they cost much more than this in New York and other cities, right?

 

[Lord Tammerlain]

What kind of driver would himself want to be in a car where the brakes are that close to failing? :lol:

One that is desparate for work

 

[Lord Tammerlain]

Would kill himself? Because that's basically what it is.

Or kill themselves from a lack of money, food etc

That's not fraud, that's not even unethical. People won't engage in the transaction unless it is beneficial to both parties.

Usually the double fee is not announced untill the end of the ride

That's not cheating. That's just misunderstanding what prices actually are.



You're telling me that cabs don't show rates right on the car or have them listed somewhere?

And why do they do that right now? A government regulation

Safety inspection is unncessary.



You are aware that they cost much more than this in New York and other cities, right?

How would the driver know the cab has bad brakes on the verge of failing if the cab is not inspected?

 

[MaggieD]

Would kill himself? Because that's basically what it is.

No, it isn't. Most likely it will result in a rear-end collission.

That's not fraud, that's not even unethical. People won't engage in the transaction unless it is beneficial to both parties.

People don't know what the fare is until they get out of the cab. Refuse to pay the driver what he asks for will usually result in a driver threatening to call the police for theft of services. That'll usually get 'em paid. It is theft by deception.

That's not cheating. That's just misunderstanding what prices actually are.

That credible link disagrees with you. And so do I.

You're telling me that cabs don't show rates right on the car or have them listed somewhere?

If they're not regulated, they don't need to show anything. Do they?

Safety inspection is unncessary.

Link please showing that safety inspection of public vehicles is unnecessary.

You are aware that they cost much more than this in New York and other cities, right?

Yeah. $200 will get you a permit in a suburban Chicago community. But you don't even have to buy one. Just go work for someone who does.

 

[phattonez]

One that is desparate for work

No one is desperate enough that they would kill themselves in such an obviously dangerous situation.

 

[phattonez]

No, it isn't. Most likely it will result in a rear-end collission.

And costs to the driver, right?

People don't know what the fare is until they get out of the cab. Refuse to pay the driver what he asks for will usually result in a driver threatening to call the police for theft of services. That'll usually get 'em paid. It is theft by deception.

If the meter is wrong then raise a complaint with the police department about it.

That credible link disagrees with you. And so do I.

You disagree, so what? Prove it wrong.

If they're not regulated, they don't need to show anything. Do they?

I was never arguing against them having a license or insurance. In fact, you seem to have missed the whole point of this thread, which is really about the number of demand-responsive transit vehicles being artificially limited by governments.

Link please showing that safety inspection of public vehicles is unnecessary.

Why would a driver go into a vehicle that isn't safe? It ultimately costs the driver money, so it isn't worth it to him. Show me that this is a prevalent problem.

Yeah. $200 will get you a permit in a suburban Chicago community. But you don't even have to buy one. Just go work for someone who does.

And yet you have failed to prove that this system does not work.

 

[MaggieD]

No one is desperate enough that they would kill themselves in such an obviously dangerous situation.

Bad brakes aren't obvious until they are. Drivers don't want to put the money out to fix an issue until it's really a bad issue. Same with bald tires. And, yes, they are desperate enough. They don't have the money. Unless they're blatantly dishonest, most taxi drivers barely make minimum wage.

 

[MaggieD]

And costs to the driver, right?

Not if it's not his cab. Most drivers don't have a pot to piss in nor a window to toss it out. When those guys get in accidents, they'll just abandon the cab...quit the company...

If the meter is wrong then raise a complaint with the police department about it.

The police department doesn't investigate fraud. People don't know the meter is wrong.

You disagree, so what? Prove it wrong.

You made the statement. You prove it right.

I was never arguing against them having a license or insurance. In fact, you seem to have missed the whole point of this thread, which is really about the number of demand-responsive transit vehicles being artificially limited by governments.

Then I guess you should stop posting to me about regulation if it has nothing to do with what you're asking about,.

Why would a driver go into a vehicle that isn't safe? It ultimately costs the driver money, so it isn't worth it to him. Show me that this is a prevalent problem.

A driver goes into a vehicle that isn't safe in order to make money. It doesn't cost the driver money unless it's his taxi. I'll show you mine if you'll show me yours.

And yet you have failed to prove that this system does not work.

The system does work. Never said it didn't.

 

[phattonez]

Bad brakes aren't obvious until they are. Drivers don't want to put the money out to fix an issue until it's really a bad issue. Same with bald tires. And, yes, they are desperate enough. They don't have the money. Unless they're blatantly dishonest, most taxi drivers barely make minimum wage.

You notice the brakes starting to go before anything bad happens. As for tires, even when they're bald you can control them. But like I said, a company won't want bad press, so unless you can prove this is a prevalent problem, I'll just move on.

 

[phattonez]

Not if it's not his cab. Most drivers don't have a pot to piss in nor a window to toss it out. When those guys get in accidents, they'll just abandon the cab...quit the company...

They face no penalties if they are responsible for the crash?

The police department doesn't investigate fraud. People don't know the meter is wrong.

Yeah, no one has ever been caught for fraud.

You made the statement. You prove it right.

I did. I already made reference to the subjective theory of value and mutually beneficial exchange. This is the standard economic thought.

Then I guess you should stop posting to me about regulation if it has nothing to do with what you're asking about,.

Yet you keep talking about it, and I don't think regulation is necessary.

A driver goes into a vehicle that isn't safe in order to make money. It doesn't cost the driver money unless it's his taxi. I'll show you mine if you'll show me yours.

Even if there is such a risk to him?

The system does work. Never said it didn't.

This is just getting tiresome. You make reference to all of these problems in the taxicab industry. I've argued showing why these wouldn't be very likely, yet you keep going on and on saying that these are problems, yet you prove none of it! In fact, the only real source you've had was an article about fares being too high, but that's completely subjective. As for these safety and emission problems, PROVE THEM! I can't keep arguing your baseless claims because I've made my point but you just deny, and it seems like this is all based on a feeling and anecdotal evidence because if you can't find the data then it probaby isn't real.

 

[Lord Tammerlain]

No one is desperate enough that they would kill themselves in such an obviously dangerous situation.

You are kidding right?

What about people who mine coal in China?

Who join the military?

People will do very dangerous things if they have to get money to support themselves.

 

[phattonez]

You are kidding right?

What about people who mine coal in China?

Who join the military?

People will do very dangerous things if they have to get money to support themselves.

Is that as dangerous as driving a cab with bad brakes? And the military is bad example, because people put themselves into danger for a very good reason, much like becoming a police officer.

So now that we have the military out of the way, how about coal mining? Well at least that won't effect anyone else, so if there is an accident all of your work won't be for naught. With a cab that might happen since an accident would be your fault so the income you made by taking the risk could just be wiped out. If the still takes the risk then the car isn't in that bad of shape most likely.

Either way, I just want people to prove that these are significant issues! It's all just speculation so far.

 

[Lord Tammerlain]

They face no penalties if they are responsible for the crash?

The owner of the cab will, if it is the cab company they will be sued. But in all likely hood it will close up shop, and the owners will open up a new one in short order if the accident was serious. The company my father worked for closed up shop (tarring roofs) closed up shop after he died on the job due to poor safety

Yeah, no one has ever been caught for fraud.

Sure they have, but not typically for $20 on an individual basis. Just try getting the police involved in such a case

I did. I already made reference to the subjective theory of value and mutually beneficial exchange. This is the standard economic thought.



Yet you keep talking about it, and I don't think regulation is necessary.



Even if there is such a risk to him?

He will think about how much risk their is, and often will take the chance

This is just getting tiresome. You make reference to all of these problems in the taxicab industry. I've argued showing why these wouldn't be very likely, yet you keep going on and on saying that these are problems, yet you prove none of it! In fact, the only real source you've had was an article about fares being too high, but that's completely subjective. As for these safety and emission problems, PROVE THEM! I can't keep arguing your baseless claims because I've made my point but you just deny, and it seems like this is all based on a feeling and anecdotal evidence because if you can't find the data then it probaby isn't real.

You have an idealized vision of humanity, certainly not one that reflects reality

 

[MaggieD]

They face no penalties if they are responsible for the crash?

They get a ticket.

Yeah, no one has ever been caught for fraud.

Lame.

I did. I already made reference to the subjective theory of value and mutually beneficial exchange. This is the standard economic thought.

You made reference? Please link me that it's standard economic thought that regulating public transportation is wrong or is not beneficial in any way.

Yet you keep talking about it, and I don't think regulation is necessary.

Why did you ask for opinions if you didn't want them?

Even if there is such a risk to him?

Yes.

This is just getting tiresome. You make reference to all of these problems in the taxicab industry. I've argued showing why these wouldn't be very likely, yet you keep going on and on saying that these are problems, yet you prove none of it! In fact, the only real source you've had was an article about fares being too high, but that's completely subjective. As for these safety and emission problems, PROVE THEM! I can't keep arguing your baseless claims because I've made my point but you just deny, and it seems like this is all based on a feeling and anecdotal evidence because if you can't find the data then it probaby isn't real.

Well, there we agree. Your refusal to listen to someone who has intimate knowledge of the taxi industry in suburban Chicago is tiresome. You say you aren't in the business. What intimate knowledge do you have about the industry? Or is it all about that body orifice thing? The "subjective" article you refer to cited proven cheating by taxis. Reading is a prerequisite.

 

[phattonez]

Well, there we agree. Your refusal to listen to someone who has intimate knowledge of the taxi industry in suburban Chicago is tiresome. You say you aren't in the business. What intimate knowledge do you have about the industry? Or is it all about that body orifice thing? The "subjective" article you refer to cited proven cheating by taxis. Reading is a prerequisite.

Surely if you have intimate knowledge then you can find statistics to prove any of your claims. It's impossible for me to prove that something isn't happening, much easier for you to prove that it is (if it is in fact happening).

 

[phattonez]

The owner of the cab will, if it is the cab company they will be sued. But in all likely hood it will close up shop, and the owners will open up a new one in short order if the accident was serious. The company my father worked for closed up shop (tarring roofs) closed up shop after he died on the job due to poor safety

Closing up shop costs money and they're not going to want to keep on making the same mistakes if they want a successful company.

Sure they have, but not typically for $20 on an individual basis. Just try getting the police involved in such a case

If it's suspected then go through the courts. If the judicial system does not have enough resources to handle it then that is a separate problem which I would agree to giving more resources to.

He will think about how much risk their is, and often will take the chance

Only if the benefit outweighs the risk. If the problem is prevalent, raise the fine, but there is still no data to show that the problem is prevalent. Even if it is, it is easily solved.

You have an idealized vision of humanity, certainly not one that reflects reality

That people work for benefit themselves? That's not idealized. People want successful businesses, they want a safe cab that earns them money. If cabs are unsafe, raise the fines for unsafe cabs. If fast meters are prevalent, then increase the fine for them and enforce these laws. But again, no one has provided any proof that these are prevalent problems.

 

[MaggieD]

Closing up shop costs money and they're not going to want to keep on making the same mistakes if they want a successful company.

No, it really doesn't. First, put BEST TAXI COMPANY on your fleet. Then incorporate as ABEST TAXI COMPANY. Get in trouble? No sweat. Dissolve ABEST TAXI COMPANY and incorporate AABEST TAXI COMPANY. Smaller taxi companies, the ones that need regulation more than any of them, aren't in the business of servicing their customers. They're in the business of leasing cabs out to unsuspecting "leasts of us" for $80-$100 a day.

If it's suspected then go through the courts. If the judicial system does not have enough resources to handle it then that is a separate problem which I would agree to giving more resources to.

No one takes someone to court for $20.

Only if the benefit outweighs the risk. If the problem is prevalent, raise the fine, but there is still no data to show that the problem is prevalent. Even if it is, it is easily solved.

Who raises the fine? What fine?

That people work for benefit themselves? That's not idealized. People want successful businesses, they want a safe cab that earns them money. If cabs are unsafe, raise the fines for unsafe cabs. If fast meters are prevalent, then increase the fine for them and enforce these laws. But again, no one has provided any proof that these are prevalent problems.

Again, who raises WHAT fine? In my world, a regulatory agency does it. Who does it in YOURS?

 

[MaggieD]

Surely if you have intimate knowledge then you can find statistics to prove any of your claims. It's impossible for me to prove that something isn't happening, much easier for you to prove that it is (if it is in fact happening).

My knowledge is first-hand. I know of three different cab companies operating in this fashion in the Chicago suburbs. Unfortunately, they don't post up their "business plans" on the internet.

You'd make a great cab driver, by the way. Tom tries to let these guys know what they're in for, what to watch out for, with the particular company he was associated with (for dispatching only, he owns his own cab), and they didn't believe him. So can't say as I blame you, really, when I think about it.

 

[phattonez]

No, it really doesn't. First, put BEST TAXI COMPANY on your fleet. Then incorporate as ABEST TAXI COMPANY. Get in trouble? No sweat. Dissolve ABEST TAXI COMPANY and incorporate AABEST TAXI COMPANY. Smaller taxi companies, the ones that need regulation more than any of them, aren't in the business of servicing their customers. They're in the business of leasing cabs out to unsuspecting "leasts of us" for $80-$100 a day.

If a company is screwing people out of money then it has to pay those people back. Just incorporating into another company does not get you out of those other obligations.

No one takes someone to court for $20.

You can report the problem to police to see if it is an on-going problem.

Who raises the fine? What fine?

There's no fine for driving without a license or insurance? Who pays when you are in a car accident?

Again, who raises WHAT fine? In my world, a regulatory agency does it. Who does it in YOURS?

City councils, courts, etc.

Again, prove that these problems are prevalent in the taxicab industry! :doh

 

[phattonez]

My knowledge is first-hand. I know of three different cab companies operating in this fashion in the Chicago suburbs. Unfortunately, they don't post up their "business plans" on the internet.

In other words, anecdotal.

You'd make a great cab driver, by the way. Tom tries to let these guys know what they're in for, what to watch out for, with the particular company he was associated with (for dispatching only, he owns his own cab), and they didn't believe him. So can't say as I blame you, really, when I think about it.

Sorry to be a skeptic. I just want someone to prove their claims, I guess that's too much to ask.

 

[Lord Tammerlain]

If a company is screwing people out of money then it has to pay those people back. Just incorporating into another company does not get you out of those other obligations.

Yes they can. The company basically dissappears, provided the owners had the right type of corporation set up they wont be legally responsible for the debts of the company. Meaning they are free to set up a new company with a new name free of the financial obligations of the old one. Given the low entry costs to becoming a taxi company (especially in an unregulated industry) the chances of them doing so would be pretty high

You can report the problem to police to see if it is an on-going problem.

And watch the police do nothing as they dont have the resources to investigate taxi fruad of $20

There's no fine for driving without a license or insurance? Who pays when you are in a car accident?

The driver wont have the money to pay, one reason he would be working for a horrible company in the first place

City councils, courts, etc.

Again, prove that these problems are prevalent in the taxicab industry! :doh

They are not prevalent in the taxicab industry right now, but then the taxi cab industry is currently regulated is it not?

 

[phattonez]

Yes they can. The company basically dissappears, provided the owners had the right type of corporation set up they wont be legally responsible for the debts of the company. Meaning they are free to set up a new company with a new name free of the financial obligations of the old one. Given the low entry costs to becoming a taxi company (especially in an unregulated industry) the chances of them doing so would be pretty high

Because there would be no personal cost to the people who run the companies, right?

And watch the police do nothing as they dont have the resources to investigate taxi fruad of $20

That kind of fraud would most likely be affecting more than 1 person and would be responsible for more than just $20 of fraud. If they don't have the resources to investigate it then give them more resources.

The driver wont have the money to pay, one reason he would be working for a horrible company in the first place

Since he doesn't have the money, he probably won't take the risk.

They are not prevalent in the taxicab industry right now, but then the taxi cab industry is currently regulated is it not?

Apparently in Chicago it isn't, and no one can prove that things are much worse there.

 

[MaggieD]

In other words, anecdotal. Sorry to be a skeptic. I just want someone to prove their claims, I guess that's too much to ask.

If it could currently be proven to the satisfaction of a court of law, they wouldn't be in business. There haven't been any investigative reports on suburban taxi scams in the Chicago area, although, now that Tom has extricated himself from one, I am thinking about sending out some feelers to some investigative reporters. However, they're truly the scum of the earth.