Quote:
you said it right - " So more drivers and more cabs on the ranks, but hey, that's OK since as long as they're not in their own motor."
fyi - i drive my own motor and dont want no numpty driver.
As I said, I've never suggested otherwise - if you read my statements then you'll see that I'm careful not to refer to the individual circumstances of people like yourself unless I actually know - above I was clearly referring to 'them' and not 'you'.
Quote:
but tell me where are these extra customers going to appear from? thin air? where are all these extra cars going to park? on top of each other? i dont know why you keep going on about Adam Smith, thier is NO collusion, the customers are not being deprived, they can ring PH, catch a bus, or walk, they already have choices.
Well as I've said until I'm blue in the face, the numbers are misleading, as we tried to explain at some length in Myth and Reality. The problem is that some local markets have been so grossly distorted for so long that sudden change could mean that the market would take some time to adjust, but that's hardly a justification for doing nothing.
A problem is that some councils are so clueless that it just makes things worse. For example, there was the old chestnut from Edinburgh that the T&G kept on going on about - that there were so many cabs after derestriction that they had to put fares up - but this would just lead to even more cabs, thus a bit like amputating a leg to deal with a cut finger.
Didn't one of the Dundee lads recently claim that there were so many cabs that the trade was trying to get more drivers into the trade - you couldn't make it up!!!
As for Adam Smith, who said there was collusion? Not me.
The point I was making was that just because the trade in Sheffield or wherever were trying to close the doors, it proves nothing other than the fact that the trade were doing what businesses and workers do as matter of course - trying to get things changed in their favour - the technical term is 'rent-seeking'.
But I often use the term cartel, but that doesn't mean illegality or even collusive secrecy. After all, OPEC is a cartel, which no one seems to have a good word for, but it's not illegal because there's nothing in international law to deal with it, and it's clearly not secret either.
Ditto restricted taxis, it's not illegal per se, but it's still a cartel between the trade's vested interests and councils.
And although it's not secret, I suspect that if the facts were more widely known then you would be on a hiding to nothing. That's why, for example, the NTA tried to claim, post-OFT, that plate premiums didn't exist
But as for your arguments, again your colleagues don't in the main seem to have any problem taking on new drivers without sufficient customers or rank space, so what are you doing about that - I can't ever recall any argument from any UK driver in this regard.
Now you guys are rejoicing about the Dft and the OFt,
Quote:
let me explain the kebab van analogy to you, thier can only be a finite number of kebab van licenses, they can only park at certain points, but if i want one i have to wait or i can buy the licence in the grey market, so basically i am being deprived the opportunity of running my own kebab van.
Well if you could maybe use more precise terminology then we might not be going round and round. If you say something is regulated then it it doesn't say much because all businesses are regulated in one way or another.
But in any case I'm not sure if it's legal to numerically control the number of kebab vans, is there any provision in the legislation for this?
As I said recently, there may be planning or other controls that may in effect amount to numerical controls, but I don't think that's the rationale for them, but of course councils don't always do what they are supposed to.
But if there are controls like this then it stinks as much as your breath the morning after a dirty big donner
Quote:
You see its exactly the same as black cabs, thier is only a finite number of work for us, but you guys would rather we go round and round..............
Any market is finite, but the vast majority of people in the UK just have to earn according to that market, so why should mr 187ums be any different?
And again, as I keep on saying, the vast majority of your colleagues in Edinburgh etc don't worry about finite markets, they just worry about getting their cars working 24/7.
The evidence shows that with derestriction the total PH and taxi supply side barely changes, so there's little change in overall work, it's just that there's a level playing field instead of preferential treatment.
Login
Register
FAQ
you 
you 
you 
