Uber to exit San Antonio due to regulations; says they're the most burdensome in the country.

  1. Phonda is correct, I wasn't referring to safety/environmental regulations. Those obviously protect consumers (or attempt to).

  2. Competition for like goods does drive down price. What would happen to San Antonian taxis if Uber decided to compete with them? They would have to drop prices in the short term (or continue as is and lose profit because some people would switch to Uber) and/or they would have to innovate in the long term (or they wouldn't be able to sustain profits at that price point). Not sure why you mention soft drinks. That's a perfect example of two powerful competiting companies (Pepsi/Coke) who competed with price (search Coke/Pepsi price wars) and drove it into the ground, so now they compete via marketing, supply chain integration strategies, and international penetration instead. Competition in that industry has led to consumer efficiency and value gains pretty much everywhere, but it has lost its luster recently (from primarily consumer preference changes, I'd wager).

  3. Competition does erode profit because any given industry only creates so much value in the short term. Every additional competitor in that industry is another company trying to take a slice of the pie. Additional companies means smaller slices initially, which also means new forms of differentiation are required to compete, so in the long term innovation is incentivized and the pie can grow. When you can't compete on price anymore you have to find other ways to be successful.

  4. Upstart competitors are more efficient (in their segment) by default, otherwise they wouldn't be competitors, they would be bankrupt. The very fact that people use a new service supports the notion that that service is in some way more efficient/better than incumbent providers because people are free to choose the service that best fits their needs.

  5. Nowhere did I say government is bad. Government is great for lots of things -- building infrastructure, defending our borders, and researching new science/tech, for example. I did say government policy is dictated by corporations, which is a fact, as shown by corporate lobbying groups writing bills and all sorts of other shit you read in the news. (Remember the Citibank bill or whatever it was called a few months ago?)

Hope this better explains why I think what I think. I tried to be clear, but do have a raging hangover. Feel free to respond with some critical analysis that goes beyond noting an industry that doesn't support your argument, using snake oil voodoo products as a prime example, and nitpicking if you disagree. It's a good discussion to have.

My entire point is that competition is a very good thing for consumers and regulations, in this case, stymied it, which is bad for consumers. There is absolutely no situation where San Antonians are better off with just taxicabs as opposed to taxicabs and Uber.

/r/business Thread Link - sacurrent.com