dan_s

There are current barriers to entry to becoming a taxi driver. Uber is a pretty good example of how things work in a more free market. Reducing regulation would help entrepreneurial taxi drivers to start new companies and compete. More competition will lower prices which is good for consumers. Taxi companies with high overhead may lose money and go out of business, some taxi drivers would lose out, but competitive entrepreneurial taxi drivers will benefit. There's red tape and barriers to entry which varies by by jurisdiction; Licensing costs for taxis can be very expensive in some cities keep competitors from entering the market. There is an age limit of how old of a vehicle can be used as a taxi, removing that limit can make operating a taxi less expensive. Taxi drivers that own their taxis make more money, so less regulation on the vehicle used will be good for taxi drivers. Costs for consumers will go down, which would be bad for some taxi drivers. But as costs of taking taxis become more accessible/competitive with public transit or Uber, more people may take taxis more often. More competition means inefficient taxi companies and drivers will go out of business. Competitive entrepreneurial drivers will benefit, and new taxi drivers will have an easier time entering the industry. As in many cases, regulation keeps prices artificially high, and reduces competition in the market. When protectionism is removed, people respond to shifting incentives, lowing barriers to entry can help less skilled people get work experience, and eventually move on to other jobs. Reducing barriers to entry punishes inefficient high-overhead producers. The flip is that a more efficient market lowers the cost of living, which benefits low income people.