The taxi-protecting laws and consumer-protecting laws are separate.
Uber could be regulated as a taxi service, just like pre-existing taxi services are. Consumer rights could be protected by the law.
However, in most places, there is a medallion system for officially-licensed taxis, which basically imposes a very high tax on anyone trying to operate as a taxi service.
Because Uber couldn't function within the medallion system, it was also shut out of consumer protection laws. But that doesn't mean things have to be that way. The problem is that allowing Uber around the medallion system essentially destroys a bunch of value already stored up in medallions.
Also, where else should someone editorialize, if not a comment on a social news site?
Uber fought pretty hard against consumer protection laws here in DC. For example, DC requires cabs to carry highr insurance and to get cars inspected more frequently.
Uber could be regulated as a taxi service, just like pre-existing taxi services are. Consumer rights could be protected by the law.
However, in most places, there is a medallion system for officially-licensed taxis, which basically imposes a very high tax on anyone trying to operate as a taxi service.
Because Uber couldn't function within the medallion system, it was also shut out of consumer protection laws. But that doesn't mean things have to be that way. The problem is that allowing Uber around the medallion system essentially destroys a bunch of value already stored up in medallions.
Also, where else should someone editorialize, if not a comment on a social news site?