Memo to anti-capitalists: Uber should celebrated, not banned

Progressives often love to claim that they are fighting to prevent big businesses from running (and thereby ruining) our lives. But this isn’t the first time that they are, in fact, doing the opposite.

Uber, a San Francisco-based transport company, came under fire in 2014 for not following certain regulations that “protect” the consumers, despite the fact it provides superior service. Uber works differently than traditional taxi services by allowing consumers to use an app to request a ride. Uber drivers do not need a permit, the way taxi drivers do, in order to serve customers, and work as independent contractors instead. This is where the controversy arises.

To make sure drivers provide good service, Uber looks at user feedback and ratings. In Nevada, taxi drivers have been swindling tourists by taking the wrong way from the Las Vegas airport to the Vegas Strip. The authorities have tried to combat this for years by setting up roadside checkpoints.

By contrast, Uber managed to solve this issue by using GPS tracking to ensure the fastest possible route. This way, the company can see if drivers are taking their passengers the correct route.

Uber could also reduce the the incidences of drunk driving accidents. If someone does not have a designated driver to get home after a night at the bar, he can simply use his phone to get a ride that will arrive quicker and more cheaply than a taxi cab.

Some complain that it will take away taxi drivers’ job and put taxi companies out of business. If this is the case, then perhaps these companies should find ways to compete with Uber in the marketplace. They can try to prevent their drivers from scamming customers, and possibly adopt some of Uber’s methods. If not, then Uber deserves to stay in business; many consumers prefer it over inefficient services that too often seek to scam them.

If consumers still dislike Uber despite all the advantages, they can simply refuse to use the service instead of dictating others’ lives. Rather than legislating Uber, progressives should  simply use the traditional services that they do support.

It’s difficult to see why people would oppose this company. The money that is saved from cheaper service will go to the creation of companies, which means jobs, or will pay someone’s wage. Also, Uber is used by ordinary people, and they use it because it benefits them.

The situation is another classic case of big business using the government to bully and eliminate competition.

Providing a service that consumers use and enjoy is not greedy; if anything, using the government to eliminate competition and forcing people to buy an inferior service is greedy.