Monday, June 20, 2016

Smoking in the washroom.

I have a memory from Westmount High School back around 1971.

It was common in those days to sneak into the boys washroom across from the cafeteria to have a quick smoke. 

Sometimes the stall would get quite crowded with participants, all sharing a single cigarette. The cigarette would develop a "heater" as we called it from being puffed on and quickly passed around. The paper would turn brown. Curiously, I don't remember anyone ever getting "caught" even though it was as regular as class changes.

So one day I was in there with Mark Waind and Chris Saunders. I was drum crazy in those days, always drumming on something. On this occasion, I was drumming away on the heater cover when Chris formed a trumpet with his hands and fingers and started to belt out a bunch of flud-uts. 
Flud-ut da dut-dut dut and so on.

Then Mark joined in with his version of a trombone or something. I started to add my own version of a vocal tuba or bass or something. (Going by memory here.)
It turned out to be one hell of a little jazz session.

Every little while, as if perfectly scripted, the music would come to a sudden stop and the three of us would below with laughter, then, just as seamlessly, we'd start "playing" again.

We had a great time. Needless to say, tobacco wasn't the only thing we smoked that day.

Sunday, June 19, 2016

Should people who are incarcerated in mental hospitals be deprived of the right to smoke?
Should the priority, when it comes down to the treatment of mental illness, be the attempt to make mentally ill patients as comfortable as possible? Or to get them to quit smoking?
After all, before they are hit by a car, or murdered on the streets, or jump off a cliff.... they might run the risk of dying of smoking-related disorders.
Where should the priority lie? To enforce the Ontario (McWynne) Liberals Smoke-Free Ontario Act? Or to making whatever remnants of the shattered lives of these people more bearable?
How difficult would it be to give mentally ill smokers an area in which they could puff away without being subject to incarceration or other authoritarian sanctions, not because it has anything to do with their underlying illnesses, but because it violates the McWynne NO SMOKING edicts?
Why am I so angry about this right now?
Why do I ask these questions?
Because a person I love very dearly is currently confined to his room, and a short corridor in a mental hospital, not because his mental condition has changed, (even though his mental condition HAS changed, for the worse, because he's been locked up. My mental condition would change too. So would yours.)
I asked one of the people at the desk, during my last visit,
"Why is he being kept locked in that corridor?"
The answer was, more or less, "Well, he has been caught leaving the ward and smoking cigarettes, he was even caught smoking cigarettes in the bathroom, and that could be very dangerous."
Yeah, smoking in the bathroom is dangerous.
Why?
Because there are a whole bunch of flammable materials in there?
Because mental patients might light the paper towels on fire?
Because a passing health care worker might get a whiff of "deadly" second-hand smoke and die of a sudden heart attack?
Nope. It's because of "policy."
I think the policy should be changed.
Why don't you give the poor bastards a place where they can  smoke?
After that, you can spend your time actually trying to help these people, instead of enforcing authoritarian edicts.

Thursday, June 16, 2016

It's Ubernacht in Hamilton


Read through the minutes of HAMILTON LICENSING TRIBUNAL from October 29th, 2015.  You will see that the City of Hamilton takes bylaw compliance very seriously when dealing with taxi operators who try to work within the law. (And who happen to be not-Uber.)

While reading, think about the treatment this same government has given to Uber in Hamilton. So far only a token 23 charges have been laid. The proposed joke fines are about $305 per charge.

23 times $305 = $7,015. Compare that to the  "evidence of the licensee’s non-compliance," a tally of convictions that represent only a fraction of the dollars and fees this city has extracted from the licensee in this case. Yet, at $11,500 these fines already exceed the $7,015 Uber will pay if convicted.

"Since April 16, 2014, Gill and his numbered corporations have been convicted of the following Provincial Offences Act charges and fined accordingly:

--- 

Inspection Date Taxicab Result

December 7, 2013 #233 000010 – 1826548 Ontario Inc. found guilty March
13, 2015; $2000.00 fine

December 7, 2013 #415 000011 – 1826548 Ontario Inc. found guilty March
20, 2015; $2000.00 fine

December 7, 2013 #017 000013 – 1826548 Ontario Inc. found guilty March
13, 2015; $2000.00 fine

February 13, 2014 #138 000801 – 1826548 Ontario Inc. found guilty March
20, 2015; $2500.00 fine

March 26, 2014 #430 001537 – 1830259 Ontario Inc. found guilty March
20, 2015; $3000.00 fine"

---

You can add another $18,000 to that $11,500 as a result of the fines that were levied as a result of "drive-offs." A drive-off occurs when a taxi driver sees a parking enforcement ticket officer writing out a ticket and drives away before the officer can issue the ticket. The fine goes to the owner of the taxicab, not the driver. 

This is Hamilton style "justice."

The owner has no control over whether his drivers drive away. The city, however, does have some control over this practice. They could stop flooding the city streets with the unnecessary licenses which  created the huge demand for parking spaces for idle taxis in the first place. (Even before Uber, Hamilton taxis were operating at less than 25% of capacity.)

If it turns out that I am guilty of double-counting, that the $11,500 in fines already includes the fines for drive-offs, it only bolsters my argument by revealing the true quality of the City's "evidence." 

The minutes of the tribunal include many references to taxicab meters that were not in compliance with the By-Law. This usually means the seals were missing or broken. None of the Uber cabs operating in Hamilton have meter seals. Not one charge has been levied against Uber, nor its drivers, for non-compliance with the By-Law as it applies to meter seals. The same thing goes for the fact that Uber taxis do not have the mandatory spy cameras installed in their cabs.

In the case of Mr. Gill, it is clear, that the decision of the tribunal was to put him out of business and completely destroy his livelihood, despite his pleas for mercy.

On the other hand, we have Uber taxi. They have simply given the city the middle finger when it comes to By-Law compliance. Instead of laying down the law in the face of Uber's open defiance, the city is desperately angling to find a way to accommodate the Uber taxi company  while Uber continues to thumb their nose at the By-Laws. 

It is difficult to put a label on this open double standard on the part of the City of Hamilton as this Ubernacht spectacle unfolds, no matter how much damage is done to those who's only mistake was to invest their lives in the taxi regime that the City of Hamilton created in the first place. (My use of the word, "Ubernacht" is based on the infamous KRISTALLNACHT pogrom that occurred in Nazi Europe in 1938. Law enforcement simply stood back and let it all happen.)

The label that would best encapsulate Hamilton's response to this rogue corporation is, most likely, a combination of the following list of suggestions:

- total cowardice (bullying the little guys while kissing the asses of the corporate behemoths.)
- total incompetence 
- total hypocrisy
- total negligence

and/or,

- Total corruption.


Oh, and by the way, if you want to witness the next chapter in the Ubernacht saga, there is going to be a performance at the City of Hamilton Council Chambers on the 26th of July. The show starts at 11:00 A.M. 

Up for discussion is a "potential new licensing category."  Can you guess what the new licensing category will be? I can. It will be proposed that Uber, unlike Mr. Gill, will be rewarded for its bold non-compliance in the form of unlimited taxi licenses. 

I don't know if they intend to hire a live band,  and provide pool tables, and an open bar, but I guarantee there will be a lot of stand-up comedy. Don't miss the entertainment!


---

References:

MINUTES 15-005
HAMILTON LICENSING TRIBUNAL
10:00 a.m.
Thursday, October 29, 2015

https://www.hamilton.ca/sites/default/files/media/browser/2016-01-29/oct29licensingminutes15005.pdf

13 more Uber drivers charged in Hamilton

http://www.thespec.com/news-story/6229199-13-more-uber-drivers-charged-in-hamilton/

KRISTALLNACHT

https://www.ushmm.org/wlc/en/article.php?ModuleId=10005201


----

More:


- What have I been saying for a while now? I have been saying that without funny money central bank inflation and a fundamentally sick economy, Uber would have never existed.
Think about it. A $62 billion taxi brokerage? Preposterous.

"There's no way Uber could have started and thrived without the cheap cash it has been able to collect from a growing pool of eager investors, almost no questions asked."

http://www.bloomberg.com/gadfly/articles/2016-06-15/uber-s-debt-fueled-cheap-price-race-is-on-borrowed-time

Uber likes being regulated so long as it can write the rules.

http://qz.com/707892/uber-likes-being-regulated-so-long-as-it-can-write-the-rules/

Has Uber changed it's terms of service? "The Service is not available for use by persons under the age of 18."- Uber

http://www.nationalpost.com/m/wp/blog.html?b=news.nationalpost.com/life/why-parents-choose-uber-to-take-their-kids-to-school-when-theyre-too-busy-to-be-a-part-time-chauffeur

- and another example of underage passengers using Uber cabs 

http://globalnews.ca/news/2763116/uber-driver-charged-following-sexual-assault-of-boy-in-oshawa-police/

- and now other curious things have been happening...

http://www.torontopolice.on.ca/newsreleases/35080





Saturday, May 21, 2016

Hamilton's War on the Cab Driver

Introduction

In order to put the current Uber controversy into some perspective, it is worthwhile examining some of the history of Hamilton's taxi business, going back over the last twenty-five or so years. I will be going largely by memory here, so if anyone disagrees, has better data, or any additions to my report, please feel free to include them in the comments section below.

I intend to demonstrate that the government of the City of Hamilton has steadfastly pursued policies which have had the effect of turning a once viable local industry into a weak, divided, angry, dysfunctional mess that was on the verge of collapse long before Uber Cab Inc. was given de facto free-reign to administer the final death blow. Most importantly, it is my aim to show that the people most hurt by government policy are the people whom politicians most sincerely and, in my view, nauseatingly, claim to care about, I.E. the poor, are the ones they harm the most with their hubristic interventions.

Whether the City's taxicab regulatory agenda was deliberately designed to crush the Hamilton taxi drivers, or whether it came about as a result of mere typical government negligence and incompetence is hard to discern. I will never forget the words of Doug Rose, Hamilton's licensing manager at the time, when he told me during a short private conversation, "What we intend to do is issue so many taxi owners licenses that the market value goes to zero." One thing is beyond dispute, the city has embarked on a wild campaign to flood the city with taxicabs over the next twenty-five or so years. The number of taxi licenses increased from about 303 in 1989 to 447 today.

1989

I had left the taxi business in 1983 to pursue a safer, more secure line of work. For the next five years, I never looked back. Then, in late 1988 I received a registered letter from the City of Hamilton, inviting me to obtain a copy of the taxicab license owners priority list. In those days, anyone could add their name to the list and there was no charge for doing so. Consequently, it contained many names of people who were not engaged in the taxi business, nor had any intention of ever doing so. I knew several of the people on that list and the thought that they would ever drive a cab was laughable. Nevertheless, it was legal to sign the list with the knowledge that, if they ever really did want to obtain a Corporation of the City of Hamilton taxicab owner's franchise, they would need to satisfy one condition in advance of being issued an owners permit (A.K.A - "plate.") They would need to be "actively engaged" in the Hamilton taxi trade for at least TWO YEARS in advance of becoming eligible. For a driver, "actively engaged" was defined as working at least two, twelve-hour shifts per week.

At the time, my name was at position 152. Due to the number of people ahead of me on the list whom I knew were unlikely to meet the requirements of obtaining their own plate, it was obvious that my real position was much closer to the top.

Unhappy with my corporate job at the time, I decided to test the waters by re-applying for my taxi driver's license and driving part-time. Business was fantastic. In the winter, traditionally Hamilton's busy time for cabs, I was able to complete about 70 trips in a twelve-hour shift. The economy was good. I decided to take the plunge and quit my corporate job.

I had one reservation about making such a critical decision. I asked myself, "But what if there is a libertarian revolution and Canada transforms itself into a totally free-market country and the taxi industry is totally deregulated?" My read on Canada's political/economic future told me that would never happen. Twenty-seven years later I can confidently say I was 100% correct.

Early Years

For the first three years following my re-entry things went well. The same old predictable pattern of slow summers followed by busy winters continued. Even though, as a libertarian, skeptical of the ability of government to regulate any industry with competence, there did seem to be some actual brain power manifest in the city's regulations. Supply and demand seemed to be well balanced. The cabs were busy, and the customers rarely had to wait more than five or ten minutes for their rides.

Then the recession of the early 1990's hit. It hit the cab business hard.

That is when my confidence in the intelligence, or motives, of Hamilton's taxicab regulators took its first hit.

Over the next few years, as the cab business experienced declining demand, the city regulators began to behave in the most inexplicable manner. They began to adopt policies that made ZERO ECONOMIC SENSE.

One thing they did was mandate higher fares. My limited understanding of economics tells me that increasing prices in a soft market is economic suicide, provided that the individual raising the prices, the guy who owns the business, is the one who suffers when demand falls off of a cliff. The key lesson here is that, in this case, the people raising the prices (I'll call it Gov. Inc.) were not the ones who would suffer from the reduction in business, and thus cannot be accused of committing suicide. It's more like murder.

Point #1: You don't raise your prices when demand for your product declines in a recession.

The next thing the city did was to issue about TWENTY-FIVE plates into this depressed market. Part of the impetus for this spasm of plate issuance was attributed to the histrionics of a city council member who had to wait too long for a taxi during a New Year's Eve bar rush. (Such is the manner in which human lives and fortunes are disposed of by the political classes.) The rank and file drivers were the ones who suffered the most from this new glut of taxis.

Point #2: You don't increase your capacity when demand for your product declines in a recession.

These two policies wrought incredible havoc on the Hamilton taxi business. Over the next few years half of the drivers left the business.

Years went by and the demand for taxis in Hamilton never rebounded to its former glory. Yet the city continued to issue more taxi plates.

Then in 2003 as a result of amalgamation, the city converted 75 worthless taxi plates formerly held in Dundas, Ancaster and Stoney Creek into standard Hamilton taxi plates. The value of those worthless plates sky-rocked to about $140,000. This whole process reeked of insider corruption given that many of the owners of these worthless plates earned instant windfalls. And many of these new plate owners had acquired multiple worthless plates before they were transmuted into gold. (The smart ones sold these plates to immigrants before Uber showed up.)

The rank and file drivers, on the other hand, faced with a sudden 25% increase in the number of cabs immediately lost much more than 25% of their earnings. Perhaps as much as 50%. (It's simple arithmetic.)

Also, concurrent with the 75 suburban plates, the city continued to issue more plates to the people on the priority list. (I was one of them.)

Doug Rose told me they were going to flood the market with plates to bring the prices down.

They did flood the market with plates. That much was true. But plate values continued to defy gravity. This phenomenon seemed to contradict economic theory. It had me scratching my head for a few years. What on earth could have been forcing plate prices up in spite of flaccid or declining demand for taxi services?

I don't know when the realization hit me, but when it did, it was one of those rare, "OF COURSE!!!" moments. How could I not have seen it sooner?

Immigration

As the 1990's wore on, I started noticing a dramatic change in the demographic composition of the taxi workforce. It was aptly demonstrated in that movie, I forget the name of it, where black detective Denzel Washington responds to the complaint from a Sikh witness about the violation of his human rights by saying, "I bet you never had a problem flagging a cab, though?"

Yes! Immigration is well known to have a "disruptive" impact on economic circumstances.

One of the major complaints about immigration is that it tends to depress wage rates in the host country. While more in-depth analysis of that claim may be controversial, there is absolutely no doubt that the immigration factor has had a major depressing impact upon the earnings of taxi drivers, aided and abetted by the concurrent activities of taxicab regulators.

The average immigrant who finds himself in the taxi business soon learns about the government run taxi plate franchise system. To that person, not encumbered by political ideology, the taxi plate is a form of property as real and legitimate as a house or a copyright. And coming, often from countries that are reputedly riddled with corruption, they believe that one of the greatest benefits of moving to the west is the so-called rule of law.

Hence, the artificial, government created market in taxicab owners franchises is as real to them as real estate or stocks and bonds.

The market value of Hamilton taxi plates was thus heavily skewed by two seemingly opposing factors. The first was the willingness of immigrants to work for much lower wages than the host population was willing to accept. The second was the intense competition amongst those immigrants to get their foot in the door in the Canadian Dream, which meant, becoming taxi plate owners, thus driving plate values UP.

The City of Hamilton's plan to decimate plate values had backfired spectacularly due to their failure to understand the impact immigration would have.

This short history covers only about twenty-five or so years. One must understand that the current crop of decision makers at city hall are blissfully ignorant of it. Yet the ghosts of Doug Rose's proclamation still seem to be guiding their policies.

Despite the failure of the agenda Doug Rose revealed to me, it seems the City's desire to drive plate values down to zero has found a new savior.

The Final Chapter: Uber Cab

I am not going to allow myself to get bogged down into explaining why Uber is just another cab company far from being an industry that "didn't exist a decade ago." To those who believe that the sudden explosion in taxicab supply on the streets of Hamilton can be attributed to "disruptive technology," I doubt I can change your minds. The sudden influx of this immigrant corporation, called Uber, has clearly shown that the "rule of law," that so many taxi owners counted upon when making critical, life impacting choices, does not, in fact, exist in Hamilton.

One thing I think we can all agree on is that the sudden withdrawal of the legal protection of taxicab owner's franchises will, undoubtedly, lead to the fruition of the agenda Doug Rose revealed to me. Taxi plate values will reach the intrinsic value of the U.S. dollar: Zero.

It will also lead to a doubling and tripling and .... ? of the number of taxicabs on Hamilton streets along with a doubling and tripling of human and physical resources made idle by distorted legal and economic factors.

Before Uber, the growing collection of cab drivers in Hamilton could have, at least, allocated their time by driving the 447 licensed taxis in the city. Now we will have an unlimited number of idle taxis all competing for a small piece of a finite pie, as unnecessary resource dollars are spent on redundant vehicles, insurance premiums, gasoline, and cars.

Who wins from this scenario?

1 - the brokers. The more cabs there are, the more they collect in dispatch fees. (currently about 6% of the gross revenue per cab.)

2 - the insurers. The more cabs there are on the streets, the more they collect in premiums. An added plus is that the more cabs there are, the less likely they will actually be moving.

3 - Uber. The more cabs there are, the more they collect in dispatch fees. (currently about 20% to 28% of the gross revenue per cab.)

4 - The politicians. Especially guys like Tim Hudak, who's ambitious promotion of one cab company over the rest is highly suspicious, to say the least. John Tory also seems to have a conspicuous role in all of this. Perhaps that is why he has blocked me from seeing or replying to any of his "tweets" on Twitter.

And even if the politicians gain nothing from their failure to adhere to their former "rule of law" convictions, they will still collect their salaries. Nor do they need to fear losing their seats since Gov. Inc. Taxicab regulatory issues are not a priority in the public mind.

Who loses from this scenario?

The drivers. Thousands of them, in a skewed global economy, all scrambling for a crumb of what is left over, tapping their fingers on the dashboard, or an iPhone, as they wait for that increasingly elusive, "ping."

Finally, I am often criticized for my liberal use of profanity in my broadcasts to the universe.

Not wishing to tarnish my reputation I will end my story with this:

Fuck!

Saturday, May 7, 2016

Toronto Sells Out to a Taxi Company: A Lesson in Crony Capitalism

First, let's start with the definition of crony capitalism from Wikepedia:

Crony capitalism is a term describing an economy in which success in business depends on close relationships between business people and government officials. It may be exhibited by favoritism in the distribution of legal permits, government grants, special tax breaks, or other forms of state interventionism.

To continue this exploration, let's imagine there is a new taxi brokerage in town. Let's call it, "Crony International Taxi."

The other Toronto taxi brokerages will be called Taxi A-n. (n = 1, 2, 3, 4, etc.)

Next, we will consult the new taxi brokerage's driver's FAQ, to use Crony International Taxi's own words in describing the tilted playing field John Crony (not his real name,) promised to deliver when he said he was working to "level the playing field," between locally owned and operated taxi brokerages and the aforenamed corporate behemoth. Remember, when a politician says something, reverse the meaning to interpret his actual intent. Using this tried and true technique you will see that Mr. Crony made his intentions clear from the very beginning.

From the new Crony International Taxi broker's website:

1)

Toronto Regulations: FAQs May 4, 2016

When will the regulations take effect?

The regulations do not take effect immediately. The implementation date is likely to be months away. Until then, operations will continue in Toronto in order to provide riders with reliable and affordable transportation. We’ll notify you of any important dates as the implementation draws closer.

Unlike Taxi A-n, Crony International Taxi is able to operate in defiance of the regulations that apply to all other brokerages. If Taxi A-2, for example, were to dispatch taxi rides to individuals without taxi licenses, using their own personal vehicles to carry paying passengers, Taxi A-2 would be immediately fined and ordered to bring its operations into compliance with existing laws. Failure to comply would result in escalating threats and fines. Continued non-compliance would eventually result in a heavy crackdown by law enforcement personnel until Taxi A-2 either complied or was driven out of business.

What makes Crony International Taxi different from Taxi A-n when it comes to law enforcement?

Cronyism.

2)

Will drivers need a special license to operate?

Drivers will not need a special driver’s license to operate. Crony International Taxi will be licensed as a Private Transportation Company (PTC) and we will supply a list of active drivers to the City on a frequent basis. Drivers who pass Crony International Taxi’s screening process (unrestricted G license, clear background screening and passed vehicle inspection) will be granted a City license to operate as a PTC driver.

All of the other brokerages will be required to use taxi drivers that have been licenced and approved by the City of Toronto, and who have paid an expensive fee (currently $329.43 per year.) Cab drivers for the Crony International Taxi brokerage will be exempt from that requirement.

3)

Will the City impose fees?

Crony International Taxi driver-partners will not have to pay any licensing fees directly to Crony International Taxi or the City. However, there will be a fee of 30 cents per ride that will be added to the total fare and paid by your riders. Crony International Taxi will collect and remit this fee to the City.

This could actually add up. In the Toronto area, Crony International Taxi is reported to provide about six million rides per year. That would result in about $1.8 million dollars in fees for Toronto, about half the amount paid by the other Toronto taxi brokerages.

This is likely to change over time with the new two-tiered taxi bylaw. Crony International Taxi will continue to grow as the rest go out of business. Surprisingly, this scenario gets a lot of applause from libertarians who equate crony capitalism with free-market capitalism.

5)

Will there be mandatory training for drivers?

There is no mandatory, City-administered training for drivers, but Crony International Taxi will continue to offer educational videos online.

"Educational videos online."

The City of Toronto has decided to scrap its mandatory 17-day training program for drivers hired by the other brokerages in order to make it look like they are actually levelling the playing field between Crony International Taxi and the rest. In truth, the city is finally admitting that its 17-day training program was a fraud from the start.

According to Sunil Johal, policy director at the University of Toronto's Mowat Centre School of Public Policy and Governance,

"A lot of people felt they weren't getting good service from drivers who were going through that training service anyway."

Taxi driving isn't rocket science. There should never have been such a course in the first place. Even so, before Crony International Taxi blew into the Toronto taxi market it would have been impossible to convince Toronto city council to abolish it.

What made the difference?

Cronyism.

6)

How will vehicle insurance work?

We have been working closely with Intact Financial to develop a new and innovative insurance plan for ridesharing that will meet the City’s new requirement. This insurance plan is undergoing regulatory approvals by the provincial insurance regulator. If approved, this insurance program will be held by Crony International and provide commercial insurance coverage on all Crony International trips. In the interim, every Crony International ride in Canada continues to be covered by auto liability insurance with Crony International’s current insurance provider.Crony International maintains insurance for bodily injury and property damage to third parties and we also have a well-established claim notification process.

In other words, Crony International Taxi can have the best of both worlds. It can continue to operate while claiming it has "insurance for bodily injury and property damage to third parties" at the same time as it wheels and deals with Intact Financial to develop a new insurance product to do .... to do what?

8)

Will my car qualify?

The City will impose a vehicle age cap of 7 years, which will not take effect immediately. For now, all vehicles 10 years or newer remain eligible for Crony International. We will send more information this summer to anybody with a vehicle older than 7 years old.

Well, Crony International Taxi drivers have already figured out how to get around the vehicle age requirement. You don't have to be a brain surgeon, or a Pakistani medical doctor, to drive a cab.

This is what I would do if I were to sign up as a cab driver with the Crony International Taxi brokerage. I would register my 2010, Crown Victoria. Then I would buy a used taxi from one of the many dying non-Crony International Taxi operators for about $500 and use that car for running my taxi business.

"Niagara police say they also learned that one driver is “currently charged with a criminal offence,” one was not the advertised Uber driver of record, one vehicle did not have provincial registration, and three drivers were from outside Niagara Region and “did not know the area.” -- see "Niagara police charge 20 Uber drivers"

9)

Will my vehicle require another inspection?

All vehicles must undergo an inspection based on criteria to be laid out by the City. We will provide details (potential dates, locations, costs) in coming weeks. We’ll work hard to make this process efficient and affordable!

If the "criteria to be laid out by the City," are anything like the rest of the special rules for Crony International they will probably resemble the following:

  1. Does it have four wheels? Check.
  2. Does it have an accelerator? Check.
  3. Does is have a steering wheel? Check.
  4. Windows and seats? Check.

And if it happens to include more onerous standards, like tire wear, Crony International cab owners will soon figure out ways to get around this, as taxi owners in the past have done.

Step 1: find a willing garage.

Step 2: before the inspection, put the vehicle on the hoist and replace the old tires with a brand new set of borrowed tires.

Step 3: take the vehicle to the designated inspection station and receive a pass.

Step 4: return to the garage and get them to put the old tires back on.

If you don't think Crony International cab owners will resort to this tactic then you probably also believe that Crony International cabbies won't be negotiating off-app trips for cash.

Which finally brings us to,

10)

Will vehicles require cameras?

There will be no requirement for cameras in vehicles.

All of the other taxi brokerages will require the expensive cameras. So much for levelling the playing field by placing expensive burdens upon all but the favoured (crony) brokerage.

One clueless Toronto politician is reported to have opined that Crony International cabs should not require cameras because all of their trips are paid for by credit cards.

Anyone who actually works in the business knows this claim is laughable. Of course, Crony International drivers are accepting cash payments for their services. Why wouldn't they? They save on Crony International's 25% brokerage fee as well as other enticements.

Conclusion:

Meet your new taxi broker, same as the old taxi broker.

Meet your new taxi driver, same as the old taxi driver.

I have almost forty years experience in a business that has, at least, a four hundred year history. Human nature, and political/market forces, never change whether they are manifest in a welfare state or an idealized laissez-faire system.


Saturday, April 23, 2016

The Complete Idiot's Guide to Ken Leenderste's Uber Recommendations

A useful tool to be employed when trying to interpret politician/bureaucrat-speak is to listen to what is being said, and reverse the meaning.

If you hear, "Peace is assured," get ready for war.

If you hear, "The economy is healthy," get ready for a crash.

And if you hear, "We are going to level the playing field," hold onto something solid.

We've been hearing a lot over the last year about leveling the playing field in Hamilton between the three taxi brokerages now operating here.

In the old "horse and buggy" days, anyone who wanted to compete in the taxi business was required to abide by a set of rules created by the local government. If anyone tried to pull an Uber in those days he would have been fined repeatedly until he stopped.

Everything changed when Uber breezed into town.

At first, many were thrown off by the preposterous claim that Uber wasn't in the business of taxiing people around. They said they were just a technology company. Move along. Nothing to see here.

It would be like Blue Line Taxi changing its name to "Blue Line Bakery" or Hamilton Cab changing its name to "Hamilton Meat Packing and Entertainment Booking," without changing anything else they do, and then expecting to ignore all of the bylaws governing taxis with impunity.

I doubt that Blue Line or Hamilton Cab would be able to get away with flouting the taxi bylaw if they changed their names so why should Uber be any different?

It's a fascinating issue.

A bizarre article appeared in Hamilton's newspaper the other day. (Hamilton rules would leave Uber, taxis on uneven playing field. April Apr 21, 2016.)

Assuming Matthew Van Dongen's report is accurate I would like to address some of the statements made in that report.
"The city will try to hold Uber to as many new rules as it thinks the global ride-hailing giant will actually agree to follow."

Really? Who is running the show down at city hall these days, Uber? When did they get elected?

And since when do the bylaws of Hamilton hinge upon whether Uber or any other taxi brokerage for that matter, agrees to follow them?

Imagine if it said, "The city will try to hold Hans Wienhold to as many new rules as it thinks that big-mouthed cab driver will actually agree to follow."

Unbelievable? Yeah, I think so.

What has Uber got that I ain't got?

Let's move on.

"Leendertse introduced councilors to new draft regulations for ride-hailing, which the public can comment on this summer, that include separate licensing fees for so-called "personal transportation providers." A bylaw would go to council for approval in the fall."

Translation:

Leendertse introduced councilors to new draft regulations for taxi driving, which the public can comment on this summer, that include separate licensing fees for "cabbies working for the Uber taxi brokerage."

In other words, the new regulations should tilt the playing field in favor of Uber taxis in order to drive the older brokerages out of business.

This is the kind of stuff that now passes itself off as public policy.

It's also the kind of stuff you read on infowars.
One of the councilors, Tom Jackson, asked a sensible question,

"Why can't we just put the words 'ride-sharing' into the existing (taxi) bylaw?"

Yes. Why not?

And to avoid any confusion, replace the word "taxi" wherever it appears in the bylaw.

Would the executives at Uber allow it?

Next,

"They should have to come under the same umbrella (of rules) that we have been facing for the past 80, 90 years," said 32-year veteran ride-sharer Jagir Multani.

"That would leave the city with a "wild west scenario," said Leendertse, who estimated there are around 500 Uber drivers who would be unable to abide by bylaw provisions that include obtaining a legal taxi plate."

Since when does the City of Hamilton work so hard to accommodate unlicensed cab drivers? In addition to the 500 Uber taxi drivers, there are also about 1000 other taxi drivers working at Blue Line and Hamilton Cab who do not have taxi plates. That hasn't prevented any of *them* from engaging in ride-sharing. Indeed, the extra 500 Uber cabs now plying the streets of Hamilton have done enormous damage to the incomes of the 1000 other cabbies in Hamilton.

What about them?

Again, why should Uber cabbies be exempt from the same rules that apply to all other cabbies?

This all actually quite funny, especially in the light of Mr. Leendertse's next statement,

"So they would just ignore (the bylaw) … and it becomes an enforcement issue."

Imagine that. An enforcement issue. Isn't it part of Mr. Leendertse's job? Is he saying that he can't deal with enforcement issues, therefore the city should cave-in to Uber?

Who is actually in charge of bylaw enforcement in Hamilton if it's not Mr. Leendertse? And if he is incapable of enforcing the law then perhaps he is not the right person for the job.

Next,

"The proposed new ride-hailing regulations would charge Uber about $50,000 to be licensed in Hamilton and would require police checks and Ministry of Transportation safety certification."

Two years ago taxi licenses were being traded for about $200,000 each. At that valuation, Hamilton's 447 licenses had a combined value of about $90 million dollars. By comparison, Mr. Leendertse's proposal grants the $62 Billion dollar Uber corporation the equivalent of an unlimited number of taxi plates for the ridiculous sum of $50,000. That is Uber paying about .005 cents on the dollar for its licenses.

It reminds me of the old story about the purchase of Manhattan from the natives for some glass beads, except that story has been challenged. This one is for real.

A necessary byproduct of this sellout to Uber, of course, is that the 447 non-Uber taxi licenses become worth less than a handful of glass beads. Those 447 taxi licenses represent the lifetime investments of hundreds of Hamilton taxi drivers.

Get this one,

Uber rates would remain unregulated while the other two taxi companies would still be forced to charge double the current Uber rate. It's not hard to predict which brokerage will win this game.

There are more proposals that also act to tilt the Hamilton taxi market in favor of a complete takeover by Uber.

Particularly galling is the recommendation that the mandatory driver training would disappear for taxi drivers. I have been one of the strongest opponents of the mandatory driver training program since the beginning and I have said so repeatedly, however, dumping the school as a bone to the non-Uber taxi drivers in order for the city to comply with Uber's business model is absolutely the LAST reason it should be done.

It's just another disgraceful example of systems set up by the government, like the equity taxi license system itself, into which innocent citizens invest their time and money and which can be summarily swept under the rug, or thrown under the bus if you like, at the whim of politicians and bureaucrats who have zero personal stake in any of the decisions they make.

The article quotes an incomprehensible statement,

"It's not perfect, said Coun. Sam Merulla, but it's better than "driving the industry underground" and leaving both riders and drivers with "zero protection.""

I really admire Sam Merulla for his ability to speak the unvarnished truth without having to impart any real meaning or substance. 

"It's not perfect."

He got that much right.

http://www.thespec.com/news-story/6506070-hamilton-rules-would-leave-uber-taxis-on-uneven-playing-field/

Thursday, March 31, 2016

Just take a look at how slick and manipulative the Uber taxi brokerage is.... consider their promotion, "Limited-time guarantee: Earn $4,700/mo* in Toronto" So far as I can tell this is a new Uber campaign, and is timed to coincide with the proposed regulations for ride-sharing services and the taxi industry Toronto municipal licensing staff will release next week. Note the asterisk*. That refers to the fine print. Here is the fine print: -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Offer is subject to change. Partner will be eligible for the guarantee amount in effect upon signup. Partner must be online in Toronto during the incentive period to qualify for the guarantee. Partners must drive a minimum of 40 hours per week to be eligible for the guarantee. Partner must take first trip within 30 days of signup to be eligible for guarantee. Once a partner takes a first trip, the guarantee will last for full four weeks (i.e. 28 days). To qualify for this offer, partner must complete at least 2 trips per hour. Trips per hour (TPH) is calculated by taking your total number of completed trips in a given incentive period divided by the total number of hours that you were online during that same incentive period. First month guarantees are paid weekly (for a period of four weeks). First month guarantees begin the Monday (at 4AM) after a partner's first trip. To qualify for this offer, partner must maintain a 90% acceptance rate over all hours driven. Your acceptance rate is calculated by taking the total number of trip requests that you accepted during the incentive period divided by the total number of trip requests that were sent to you during that same incentive period. To qualify for this offer, partner must maintain a completion rate of 25%. Completion rate is calculated by taking your total number of completed trips in a given incentive period divided by the total number of trip requests that you received in the given incentive period. To qualify for this offer, partner must maintain a 4.5 rating. Guaranteed amounts are average gross fares, and include the Uber service fee. Booking Fee and tolls are not included in the guaranteed amount. We reserve the right to withhold or deduct payments that we determine or believe were in error, fraudulent, illegal, or in violation of driver terms or these terms. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- A couple of Uberpeople.net members commented on the program. Biozon said, "To many conditions." (sic) A second one chimes in, "Aaaand what about protecting our butts?? Some of us signed on with Aviva because we don't want to screw our future. I may work in T. this summer depending on job circumstances or London. Uber is asking anyone who protected themselves with Aviva's insurance to blow it. No thanks." A friend of mine, who drives for Uber because the City of Hamilton suspended his taxi driver's license, for alleged non-compliance with taxi regulations (duh!), has also told me that Uber's guaranteed earnings campaigns are impossible to, uhm, comply with. Ergo.... an Uber driver can almost never meet the stated conditions.... either there are not enough trips or the app crashes throwing him offline. But what I find most significant about this Uber campaign is the condition that its "partners," - " must drive a minimum of 40 hours per week to be eligible for the guarantee." 40 hours per week. In spite of the fact that the new Aviva "ridesharing" policies are only valid for Uber cabbies who drive no more than 20 hours per week. Uber surely knows this. They also know that almost none of their partners are carrying proper taxi insurance. The conclusion is that Uber is knowingly incentivizing its cab drivers to take serious risks with respect to their insurance coverage. And not only that, Uber is knowingly subjecting a naive and unsuspecting public to the risks of inadequate insurance coverage. And in spite of all of THAT.... politicians are all busy re-writing the taxi bylaws to give Uber costless entry into the taxi market that will devastate the existing fleets of fully insured taxis. You can't make this stuff up.



This Post Can't be Shared on Facebook

Milloy talks Biden climate agenda with Stuart Varney on FOX Business From the April 19, 2024 episode.