We are developing the social individualist meta-context for the future. From the very serious to the extremely frivolous... lets see what is on the mind of the Samizdata people.
Samizdata, derived from Samizdat /n. - a system of clandestine publication of banned literature in the USSR [Russ.,= self-publishing house]
|
“Consumers? Eh, Fuck ’em” says German state… and the French state agrees naturally Uber banned for the second time in Germany:
A regional court in Frankfurt ruled that Uber’s low-cost ride-sharing service UberPop is now banned throughout the country. The case was brought by taxi union Taxi Deutschland that been battling Uber for over a year.
And the French state agrees:
Around 30 police officers were sent into the Parisian Uber headquarters on Monday as part of an investigation into its UberPop service, which connects drivers with passengers via a smartphone app.
The state really hates it when their Permit Raj and compliant patron rent-seekers get threatened. Next thing you know, uppity consumers sick of overpriced taxies might start thinking state state involvement was not necessary!
|
Who Are We? The Samizdata people are a bunch of sinister and heavily armed globalist illuminati who seek to infect the entire world with the values of personal liberty and several property. Amongst our many crimes is a sense of humour and the intermittent use of British spelling.
We are also a varied group made up of social individualists, classical liberals, whigs, libertarians, extropians, futurists, ‘Porcupines’, Karl Popper fetishists, recovering neo-conservatives, crazed Ayn Rand worshipers, over-caffeinated Virginia Postrel devotees, witty Frédéric Bastiat wannabes, cypherpunks, minarchists, kritarchists and wild-eyed anarcho-capitalists from Britain, North America, Australia and Europe.
|
Yes Perry – par for the course really.
As with prostitution, what part of that transaction is actually illegal? When you break it down, it’s two people getting into contact with one another, and then one of them giving the other one a ride in his car, followed by a reciprocation with cash.
At what point does the state step in and say, “All right, now you have broken a law and must face a sanction” ? Certainly giving someone a ride in your car is still perfectly legal in Germany. And giving someone money is, I assume, perfectly legal as well. But combine them, and you are a criminal? Truly bizarre.
Meanwhile, in South Korea: South Korean police book 29 Uber staff for ‘illegal taxi’ ops
Not quite related, but one signer to the contract has a sob story, and the other signer is easy to gin up hatred against, so Chuck Schumer says fuck contract law.
I don’t see how this can pass constitutional muster regarding the clause about not interfering in contracts, but there you are.
Why isnt anyone asking the politicians who make these decisions why they are colluding to continue such a rent-seeking arrangement? I want to see them scatter like cockroaches.
I get your point, Ted, but as I read the Constitution it prohibits a state from passing a law impairing the obligation of contracts, but not the federal government. Schumer’s bill is federal. There may be a Supreme Court case somewhere interpreting it more broadly, but I don’t know about it.
Such questions get treated like a fart in an elevator: everyone knows it’s there, and nobody says anything.
But is that (passing such a law) within the enumerated powers of the United States? (however much constitutional yoga ‘twist, stretch, turn and back’ is performed?)
If you can simply bypass that pesky 4th Amendment completely by ‘arresting’ property as if it was a person, rather than property seized from a person, the hell does it matter what the US Constitution says? It is just so much paper now and not even soft enough to be worth wiping your arse on.
Bombadil, lots of things are like that. Some glues come with two components, which only work (that is, get you into a sticky situation) when combined. A gun without bullets is just a club, and bullets without a gun are just weights, but when they are combined, they are more than the sum of their parts.
Perry:
A lot of people have joked about it but, so far as I know, nobody has actually marketed U.S. Constitution toilet paper. I bet it would sell well.
Mr Ed, those “enumerated powers” are now just an amusing historical oddity. Of course such a law is not within those powers, but then neither is 90% of what our federal government does these days. Given the Supreme Court’s extraordinary (wholly irrational, unjustifiable and a-historical) interpretation of the scope of the Commerce Clause, enumeration of powers today means nothing at all.
Tedd, you just might be on to something there, especially in Washington. The current White House would buy it by the carload.
Tedd, there seem to be lots of other novelty toilet papers. Yours doesn’t seem to be among them, though. An opportunity?
Indeed, didn’t someone claim that America had irrevocably altered its’ constitution in the Civil War? That government had become so big, it was outside the scope set for it in the constitution?
Never stand between a politician and money.
Uber would be largely cash transactions (doubleplusungood), with no government fees or licenses to be paid (megadoubleplusungood) and no large taxi concerns to “lobby” you with money and free rides (supermega…, ah you get the idea)
Huge numbers of unskilled professions are regulated out of “common” peoples reach by government fiat.
Is there any particular reason that the HQ of Paris Uber need to be in Paris? I mean, it would be hard to get 30 Paris police officers to go after an HQ in New York. It would be more flic-proof.
Yes New York might be more flic-proof but if Uber want to run their operations in France from overseas, they need to pick somewhere the IRS and NY city government do not preside over things. Do they really want to pay US taxes on their French operations? I would suggest London actually. Or Zurich. Or better yet, Riga.
Someone go and code up a blockchain-based ride sharing app. Instead of monetary transactions, users would be able to create transactions containing location updates, ride requests, bids and feedback.
Someone at least made a proof of concept: http://pando.com/2014/12/12/ridecoin-combines-uber-and-bitcoin-in-the-ultimate-troll-against-government-oversight/
That is awesome Rob! Indeed it deserves its own article, or at least a pointer… over to you!
What’s likely to happen is Uber gets more ubiquitous in the rest of the world, i.e. outside of Paris and their banning will seem more and more obscure as time goes on, to both locals and visitors alike. In a few years it’ll seem as arbitrary as the UAE’s ban on VOIP telephone calls, only this time in countries that matter.
Rob Fisher: Doesn’t read as if the arseholes on the website your link goes to were very keen on the idea. Good–if it upsets leftists it has merit.
[Eye roll]
I can never get a handle on the left’s paradigm. Is it really as simple as, “If money changes hands it’s evil?” I would have thought unregulated and unregulatable ride sharing would be the kind of thing the left loved. Or am I just remembering the trippy left of 45 years ago?
I know I’m a bit late to the show but some one has KickStarted Constitution toilet paper.
https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/constitutiontp/us-constitution-toilet-paper
Guernsey? No VAT.