Hacker News Reader

>Regulation never helps the end-consumers

The FDA, FDIC, and other acronyms would like to have a word with you.

Also, at least in Germany, there's some responsibilities that official taxies have in exchange for their quasi-monopoly - transportation duty for example.

This is a double-edged sword as well when thinking about needing to drive a drunk, mentally ill or homeless person, but this is critical for elderly or disabled people. My wife was once refused transportation by a taxi driver when she had just to go two kilometers from the airport with a broken leg (granted, shitty situation for both sides here) - and she got compensation and another driver from the taxi central immediately.

While I'm with you on better regulation, blind deregulation has too much collateral damage IMHO.

The problem with the U.S. is that there tends not to be a complete absence of regulation, but regulation that is often poorly designed and/or executed. It's sort of why for decades the American government has spent huge amounts on healthcare, despite politicians bashing the notion of universal healthcare at every turn. I definitely agree that the solution should be better regulation.

Plenty of people would debate whether those programs are a net benefit.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com