> You don’t understand how miserable the cab system was (and generally still is) in most of the US because you lived in an aberration.
That's circular - you repeat your conclusion (cabs are poor) as evidence for it. I've taken cabs in many, many cities. Some cities do lack sufficient cab service; I'll agree with that.
> Not even on the top 10 of concerns surrounding Uber for the 95% of the population who don’t live in a super dense city
The standard isn't 'super-dense', and more people live in cities than you think. Plus, why are the concerns of people in cities any less important than yours?
> it’s not free use because the drivers pay the same road taxes we do. They just aren’t double taxed without the medallion system.
It's not the drivers using it, it's Lyft and Uber. Corporations are separate entities using the road space for profit.
> The standard isn't 'super-dense', and more people live in cities than you think. Plus, why are the concerns of people in cities any less important than yours?
The standard absolutely is super dense. I live in a spread out city and your concerns are completely hollow. Nobody in Houston is concerned about the number of Ubers on the road.
> It's not the drivers using it, it's Lyft and Uber.
It’s the driver’s car. The driver is driving it. It’s the driver.
That's circular - you repeat your conclusion (cabs are poor) as evidence for it. I've taken cabs in many, many cities. Some cities do lack sufficient cab service; I'll agree with that.
> Not even on the top 10 of concerns surrounding Uber for the 95% of the population who don’t live in a super dense city
The standard isn't 'super-dense', and more people live in cities than you think. Plus, why are the concerns of people in cities any less important than yours?
> it’s not free use because the drivers pay the same road taxes we do. They just aren’t double taxed without the medallion system.
It's not the drivers using it, it's Lyft and Uber. Corporations are separate entities using the road space for profit.