Uber Approved in Quintana Roo

[ggunn]

LASIK

I had my eyes lasered some years ago; I thought that it would be permanent but 10 or 15 years later they were right back where they had been before the procedure.

 

[morecowbells]

We discussed this at some length when it happened. Whoever arranged for that transportation was either very naive about Cozumel or an idiot thinking that the taxi union would not take exception to what they were doing.

You are missing the point. The taxi union should not be so powerful as to intimate the airlines decisions on how to transport innocent passengers to the airport. The shaming should not be with the airlines but some of the taxi thugs.

 

[L13]

I'm in the far suburbs of a smaller city, and as I write I can have an Uber driver show up at my house in 10 minutes from now (just checked the app) -- that's a massive improvement.

The Uber app allowing you to know approximately how soon the Uber would be there and how much it would cost to your destination, was a game changer -- that's why people loved it and it became so popular.

The taxis could have done this. But they didn't, because they thought they had a monopoly.

Monopoly's are almost always bad, but unfortunately very often the thing that broke the monopoly grows to be the new monopoly.

 

[gopbroek]

You are missing the point. The taxi union should not be so powerful as to intimate the airlines decisions on how to transport innocent passengers to the airport. The shaming should not be with the airlines but some of the taxi thugs.

On a number of occasions I have tried to get a cab home from Ohana's, on a rainy evening, and Mateo can't get them on the phone. I will slug down to the taxi union dispatch office, on Calle 2, in the rain, and go up to the dispatchers window and get the fat slob of a dispatchers attention, who is ignoring the phone ringing off the hook, and he will begrudgingly tell the next driver in waiting room through the interior window.

 

[berndo]

The taxis could have done this. But they didn't, because they thought they had a monopoly.

Monopoly's are almost always bad, but unfortunately very often the thing that broke the monopoly grows to be the new monopoly.

Taxis are not a monopoly, they are not one company that siphons money out of a local community.

 

[berndo]

There are quite a few taxi mafias around the world who are not as inclusive and open to new employees such as Uber.

So what? Because in some cities there were too few cabs and in some places there is a taxi mafia (allegedly) you wanna put thousands of small companies out of business and create low wage jobs.
If you have city in the States that used to have a couple of taxi companies the money would at least stay in the community. Now you killed those jobs for super low wage jobs and money flows out of the community to a few a$$holes in their HQ from all around the country. People that use the companies are helping to create more poor working people and supporting companies and billionares that don't to pay tax.
If you do it in a poor country, it's even worse.

When it started, Amazon was the small business. They started with books only, and both Barnes & Nobles and Borders Books were much bigger, they won on convenience and quality of service. Now Borders is out of service and B&N is the smaller company. When Amazon moved into other areas, there were several much bigger competitors, all of which let Amazon grow based on customer experience to the point where it had the power to be noncompetitive, dominate the market, and drive small players out.

Has nothing to do with anything I said or even with the topic and is evanding the point.

 

[L13]

Has nothing to do with anything I said or even with the topic and is evanding the point.

Amazon being the small business at it's beginning has nothing to do with:

No, the real world doesn't work like that. A big money player can run at a loss in some sections of the business to kill competition. Happens all the time. A small business can't do that.

????

Maybe you should get better at stating your point instead of ranting and raving.

 

[berndo]

Amazon being the small business at it's beginning has nothing to do with:

No, it has nothing to do with anything I said. The point was that people support a business model that kills small businsses and creates minimum wage jobs and eff over the people that used to be middle class. Not very hard to follow for most people... you'd think.

And amazon was never a small business but was well funded from the start and was run at a loss to buy market share. That's not something a small business can do with a bank loan.

 

[ggunn]

You are missing the point. The taxi union should not be so powerful as to intimate the airlines decisions on how to transport innocent passengers to the airport. The shaming should not be with the airlines but some of the taxi thugs.

Au contraire. I made no judgement on whether the taxi union was right or wrong in what they did, although you of course are free to do so. It's their country and their system, and I would not presume that it is mine to judge. For all I know the residents of Cozumel are perfectly happy with the status quo.

My point is that whoever arranged for the bus(es) should have known that there would be a negative reaction from the taxi union; they could have and IMO should have made arrangements that would not have caught tourists in the middle of a confrontational situation. They could have avoided it, but due to either ignorance or intent they chose not to do so. If you poke a wasp nest with a stick you should know that the wasps will come out and sting you; whether the wasps are right or wrong in their response is irrelevant.

We flogged this dead horse into a greasy spot on the ground back when it was news.

 

[L13]

Au contraire. I made no judgement on whether the taxi union was right or wrong in what they did, although you of course are free to do so. It's their country and their system, and I would not presume that it is mine to judge. For all I know the residents of Cozumel are perfectly happy with the status quo.

My point is that whoever arranged for the bus(es) should have known that there would be a negative reaction from the taxi union; they could have and IMO should have made arrangements that would not have caught tourists in the middle of a confrontational situation. They could have avoided it, but due to either ignorance or intent they chose not to do so. If you poke a wasp nest with a stick you should know that the wasps will come out and sting you; whether the wasps are right or wrong in their response is irrelevant.

We flogged this dead horse into a greasy spot on the ground back when it was news.

To translate: "I make no judgement about party X, it's their thing I should not presume to judge. Party Y on the other hand was completely wrong not to anticipate party X's behavior and is fully responsible for any impact on party Z by party X, it is perfectly alright for me to judge party Y. In fact I will only do business with party X to prove my non-judgmentalism."