undefined | Better HN

0 pointsbsder8y ago0 comments

Yeah, Uber and Lyft spent VC money to lobby the state government to override what the Austin voters decided.

So much for the will of the consumer, eh?

But, hey, that's what "DISRUPTION!" looks like nowadays, right?

0 comments

> So much for the will of the consumer, eh?

I think demand is a better proxy for the will of consumers than any law or legislation. If the citizens of Austin refuse to use Uber or Lyft they will disappear without any legislation.

qbrass8y ago

The tourists have more sway as consumers than the citizens do. There's more of them, they're more likely to use a ride-sharing service, and they're more likely to choose Uber of Lyft over a local brand just from the name recognition.

pyronik8y ago

Who's being forced to use uber/lyft? Ironic that you believe state intervention into markets as being the "will of the consumer".

jakebasile8y ago

The Austin fingerprint law was a voter initiative passed by Austin citizens. The state of Texas overturned it by vote of elected representatives from across the state. I think the latter is much more a "state intervention".

indubitable8y ago

It's interesting to precisely consider what "a voter initiative passed by Austin citizens" translates to. And to clarify the fingerprint law was not what was actually passed. That law was passed unilaterally by the city council --- whom a cynic might suggest was driven by what we'll call "lobbying", rather than necessity. The vote was a result of ride sharing services collecting the necessary tens of thousands of signatures that required the City Council to either soften the rules or bring the matter to public vote. The council chose to spend the hundreds of thousands of taxpayer dollars necessary to keep the ordinance intact and hold an impromptu election.

These [1] are the results of that election. Austin has a population of 950,000 residents with a voting age population of about 741,000 [2]. In total about 5% of the resident population voted to maintain the fingerprinting law and 4% to soften it. A 1% margin on a voter turnout of less than 12%.

I fully appreciate that that is a 'democratic republic in action.' I'm certain you can understand one might find it distasteful, just as one can easily understand your distaste for state level 'democratic republic in action.' I'm certain our systems made all the sense in the world hundreds of years ago. But these sort of things do not feel right today when we live in a country with counties that now have greater population than the entire country did when these laws and systems were developed.

[1] - http://traviselectionresults.com/enr/contest/display.do?crit...

[2] - https://www.census.gov/quickfacts/fact/table/austincitytexas...

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse