I don’t think this is given - e.g., in NYC, Chicago, and SF, most cabs are driven by poor immigrants[1] and most rent (in economic terms) is extracted by medallion owners.

[1] Nothing wrong with being an immigrant - I’m one myself, although not poor anymore. I’m just pointing out that pre-Uber system didn’t offer much protection either. Since driving is an easily obtainable skill with no differentiation whatsoever, driving for hire - be it a cab driver, truck driver, or Uber driver - will always be a low-earning job.

Sounds good for the taxi cartels... not good for the drivers who would now have fewer job options and less control over accepting work on their terms.

And of course a huge blow to consumers which is the whole point of Uber's existence anyway.

The current solution benefits drivers sufficiently to entice them to do it over a different job. I’m not sure why people feel that the current situation must be changed.

I haven’t been to Paris lately but my friends there describe it that way: Uber drivers there now need some hard-to-get and I believe limited license, so the drivers there are a lot less abundant, prices are higher and wait time longer.

I wouldn’t be surprised if city hall economists publish some impact study on drivers’ revenue, or on congestions: both are hot topics there.