Deregulation support

Deregulation support

The taxi deregulation proponents argue, that deregulation will result in the following benefits: [67]

lower prices, because there are several taxis compete in the market;
incentivized by lower operating costs, competition;
competition increases quality and pressure, to increase a person's reputation;
new innovations, such as markets and people with disabilities on a shared journey, Special Features new market niches;
demand for taxi services is growing, as prices fall, the quality is improving.

However, it seems, that consensus, the taxi deregulation has been less convincing, he hoped such support. [67] the possible causes include insufficient deregulation and over-estimation thorough deregulation [67]

Deregulation also claim support, to increase the level of taxi service in most of the poorest sections of the city. The effect is the highest peak and the bad weather, when demand is the highest. [67]

The lawyers also claimed by deregulation, the regulated environment: [67]

Black market becomes legal taxis, all of them eliminate the problem,
cities save money, since they do not need to design and implement the rules.

Number of almost all cities deregulation of taxis has increased, More people were employed, as drivers, and deregulation lawyers claim needs more satisfied. [67]

The existing taxi companies may try to restrict competition by potential new entrants. for example, New York City had the monopoly advantage of the taxi license holders $590 000 000 At the beginning of the 1980s. The city 1400 license is less, sample 1937. Proponents of deregulation argue, the main losers of car-less poor and the disabled. [67] the taxi owners to form a powerful lobby network, which marginalize drivers and taxi users. They also pay a taxi to the local government officials to maintain control. [68] Regulators generally do not wish to rise to the taxi owner Lobby. [67] politicians do not want, the taxi drivers a negative opinion about them. [69]

Taxi deregulation proponents claims, that immigrants and other minorities, the poor suffer most of the taxi regulations, because the work requires, relatively little education. Regulation makes the entrance to the taxi business is particularly difficult for them. [70] the elderly, people with disabilities, housewives and poor use taxis more often, than others. [67]

Moore and Rose, it is better, to address the potential problems directly rather than deregulation, to regulate the number of taxi licenses. For example, if the regulators want to increase security, They should take basic safety rule, or shall publish a list of safe public taxi operators. [71]

Deregulation proponents also claim, that if the officials want to regulate prices, It is more standardized measures in place measures, like driving prices. for example, may require, the first long-distance tariffs 1/5 are set miles, and any further 1/3 miles, make it easier to compare prices in different taxis. Prohibit other pricing, such as long distance pricing. [67] Lawyers argue for deregulation, that regulators have only very limited information on the market