I hadn't looked into those details. Article: Uber Just Responded To The New York Attorney General's Surge Pricing Investigation.
I think often these types of laws put the force of government behind efforts to prevent people from entering into agreements or transactions that the lawmakers find objectionable (prima facie). These regulations are necessary at some level to protect needed goods and services in emergencies, which "private car service" is sort of a grey area. Do we really need a a light weight version of a "Limo" service? Should hotels be able to charge more when there are big events in town due to high demand? For me, I'd rather rely more on consumer choice, and the logic of supply and demand. Matthew Yglesias had a good bit in Slate on gouging, where he says, "Stopping price hikes during disasters may sound like a way to help people, but all it does is exacerbate shortages and complicate preparedness."
The government competes against the market with its own transit, and in times of high demand and shortage (of gas mostly due to mostly hording) all transit suffers. I'm not really advocating against some consumer protections, especially the deception parts (bait and switch, etc). Mostly, I'm concerned with the government protecting its own special interests and throwing a cold wet blanket on market innovation.
The alternative is for Uber, and similar services to opt out of business when their projected expenses exceed normal fares. Although, I'd guess its a strategy leading to bankruptcy and deprives the market of the service or good entirely. I'm unsure if a fixed limit (say 10%) on price hikes may account for the variability of expenses incurred by a business during high demands, and the trail of who charged who in the supply chain gets pretty murky and even leading to other states, and other countries where the laws are different.
My thoughts on government involvement, would be that some regs may be good during a state of emergency to hold business accountable for obscene profits (rather than price), although they'd do better by ensuring their own transit services are able to hardened to withstand and accommodate demands during these disasters.
I think often these types of laws put the force of government behind efforts to prevent people from entering into agreements or transactions that the lawmakers find objectionable (prima facie). These regulations are necessary at some level to protect needed goods and services in emergencies, which "private car service" is sort of a grey area. Do we really need a a light weight version of a "Limo" service? Should hotels be able to charge more when there are big events in town due to high demand? For me, I'd rather rely more on consumer choice, and the logic of supply and demand. Matthew Yglesias had a good bit in Slate on gouging, where he says, "Stopping price hikes during disasters may sound like a way to help people, but all it does is exacerbate shortages and complicate preparedness."
The government competes against the market with its own transit, and in times of high demand and shortage (of gas mostly due to mostly hording) all transit suffers. I'm not really advocating against some consumer protections, especially the deception parts (bait and switch, etc). Mostly, I'm concerned with the government protecting its own special interests and throwing a cold wet blanket on market innovation.
The alternative is for Uber, and similar services to opt out of business when their projected expenses exceed normal fares. Although, I'd guess its a strategy leading to bankruptcy and deprives the market of the service or good entirely. I'm unsure if a fixed limit (say 10%) on price hikes may account for the variability of expenses incurred by a business during high demands, and the trail of who charged who in the supply chain gets pretty murky and even leading to other states, and other countries where the laws are different.
My thoughts on government involvement, would be that some regs may be good during a state of emergency to hold business accountable for obscene profits (rather than price), although they'd do better by ensuring their own transit services are able to hardened to withstand and accommodate demands during these disasters.
”There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio, Than are dreamt of in your philosophy." - Hamlet (1.5.167-8), Hamlet to Horatio.
![[Image: yVR5oE.png]](http://imagizer.imageshack.com/img924/329/yVR5oE.png)
![[Image: VKQ0KLG.png]](http://i.imgur.com/VKQ0KLG.png)