Caledonian Cabbie wrote:
Not as pished off as those relying on the trade as their only incomce but hear people who work like yourself in the HC trade and who don't rely on the job but because there are too many cars operating manage to get the number of vehicles limited, adding insult to injury.
It used to be my only income until about 2 years ago, things change. I don't know what others do, but, I know I don't try to restrict anybody. My comments regarding derestriction are just an opinion
Caledonian Cabbie wrote:
I have no particular problem with your three jobs, but it's surely a bit brass necked to then tell HC drivers that they can't run their own vehicle because there's 'too many taxis'?
I've never said anybody can't do it. I've given my opinion regarding restricted and derestricted trade. I don't believe derestriction works, managed growth is better.
Caledonian Cabbie wrote:
But unfortunately your own situation demonstrates one of the problems leading to poor earnings, namely the amount of people just doing he job to supplement their pension, 'proper' job etc.
I like the variety at the moment but I don't drive ph to supplement anything. All 3 jobs together make up my required earnings. If any of the jobs stop performing the way I need them to I'll simply bin that job and concentrate on the others. I make no excuse for making money the way I do
Caledonian Cabbie wrote:
I know such people with HCs in restricted areas, for example, who do the job merely as second or even third fiddle to their main income, but full time drivers are forced to either drive for them or pay an inflated sum for a plate.
There's surely something wrong there?
There is something wrong there I agree, but, I still think derestriction isn't the answer. I wish I did have an answer to this problem I really do, but, I don't
Caledonian Cabbie wrote:
My point is that it's making a virtue of forcing drivers into someone else's car and having to work nights to pay the inflated rentals.
I see your point, I see every point everybody makes, but, I don't have to agree with it. Nobody is forced into renting a vehicle. They choose to do the job with it's current conditions. It has it's problems that obviously need solving, derestriction is like taking a sledge hammer to crack a monkey nut
Caledonian Cabbie wrote:
So you'd prevent others operating a WAV HC even though it doesn't suit you
No that's not why I'd do it, if I did do it. The point I was trying to make, and I think you know this because you ain't stupid, is there are always options available if the current situation doesn't suit you. Whether somebody chooses to exercise their option is entirely up to them
Gusmac wrote:
You changed the context here. My answer was not in response to this question.
You answered a question I asked Jasbar
Gusmac wrote:
I wouldn't rule it out but there would need to be a compelling case for it.
I believe with proper quality control of drivers and vehicles, along with the removal from the market of the exploiters and hangers on, there would be no need for a blunt restriction of numbers.
You're describing derestriction, so what compelling case would there be to restrict numbers?
Gusmac wrote:
We are close to agreement here, believe it or not.
Restriction creates the value. Without the restriction, there is no value.
The law allows it, feeds it and lets it grow but without the restriction, it wouldn't exist in the first place.
Even if the law didn't allow it, value would still exist for those prepared to flout the law.
If the law did what it should do, if it was ever changed in the manner described previously, than that also should prevent a value on plates. If the penalty for breaking the law was such that the people involved lost the money made from selling the plate (much like drug dealers are) and also the plate was returned to the council, that would be a decent deterent wouldn't it?
Gusmac wrote:
But there is demand, toots. Just not as much as you might like.
If there was no demand, you would all be doing zero fares and making no money.
The market has found it's level. It's just not as high a level as you or others might want.
The fact is that those within the market choose to tolerate the level of earnings they are making.
If they didn't, they would move on or go bust.
That's market forces.
I realise there is a demand, I'm not completely blonde ffs. The demand is fine for me. What I obviously haven't got across is when I say 'I don't need' I'm not gloating or bragging it's because I only have to worry about me. No family, no mortgage and very low living costs. I'm lucky I know that but there are guys out there in my area having to work stupid hours to earn a decent living and I don't think that's right. They don't tolerate the level of earnings by choice, it's a case of having to. You say they would move on, move on to where? the dole queue? or go bust, well that's not a good thing either when you have a family and a mortgage. It's far easier to work longer hours which is what most drivers do in a derestricted area