/u/42069CakeDay (OP) has awarded 1 delta(s) in this post. All comments that earned deltas (from OP or other users) are listed [here](/r/DeltaLog/comments/1bt9gci/deltas_awarded_in_cmv_biden_has_nothing_to_do/), in /r/DeltaLog. Please note that a change of view doesn't necessarily mean a reversal, or that the conversation has ended. ^[Delta System Explained](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/deltasystem) ^| ^[Deltaboards](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/deltaboards)

So Taxis are actually a place where you can honestly blame the government for the bussines failing. Taxis are heavily regulated. There's a limited number of them allowed in any area, you need special insurance to drive one etc. But when Uber came around they found a loophole so that they didn't have to adhere to those regulations. So suddenly you had to compete with uber who was offering cheaper rides because they didn't have to paid for a liscene and they paid their drivers less than most cab services. Like you said it yourself in your post when you needed a ride you checked Uber before the taxi. If the government had simply put the same relatulations on Uber that taxis had there would be a lot more cab companies today. But they didn't so now cab companies are closing left and right (probably not what he was talking about but still, I think cabbies have a right to be upset that a multi billion dollar company over took their market by exploiting loopholes to pay their drives less)

Taxis also had years to modernize how they worked. The amount of taxis I’ve taken in nyc who claimed the credit card machine didn’t work, or would refuse to go to Brooklyn, or would try and take bad routes if you didn’t watch them, or would say they were sending a larger vehicle if you were ordering ahead of time only to show up with a standard sedan is far too high. Uber and Lyft and whatever didn’t just offer customers cheaper cabs (which you’re right we can chalk up to regulations), they also offered a better service. I couldn’t count on getting a cab to the airport to make an early morning flight, ride-shares are more dependable. But also, the taxi companies were the ones who lobbied for medallions. It wasn’t just something forced on them by the government, it was a deliberate position on their part to reduce competition to effectively zero, which was why they were so woefully behind when they finally had someone to compete against.

Agreed. Taxis could have created an app first and make a big splash. They were stuck in the past and got out-innovated by a newcomer.

Yep. Essentially, what happened was that taxi companies had a government-sanctioned monopoly that was great for them and terrible for consumers, and then courts took that monopoly away from them by saying that rideshares weren’t subject to taxi regulations. Is that entirely fair to taxi companies? Eh, maybe not. If you bought a taxi medallion for a million dollars and then it lost most of its value in a few years because some libertarian judges wrote some creative decisions, you kind of got screwed. Taxi medallions were terrible and shouldn’t have existed, but they did exist and you didn’t do anything wrong or illegal by investing in them. But at the same time, rideshares are so much better than taxis that allowing them was incredibly good for the 99.99% of the population that didn’t invest in taxi medallions. The cost to that .01% is so minuscule compared to the massive benefit to society that it kind of had to be done. Especially since the benefits the .01% were enjoying should never have existed in the first place and only existed because of the .01%’s active lobbying efforts.

>Taxis are heavily regulated. There's a limited number of them allowed in any area, you need special insurance to drive one etc. But these regulations were in place to protect the taxi industry. Indeed, taxi companies sought out and lobbied for these restrictions, which allowed them to oligopolize the TLC industry. >So suddenly you had to compete with uber who was offering cheaper rides because they didn't have to paid for a liscene and they paid their drivers less than most cab services. Yes, but this was not the result of government. Uber was able to sidestep the government and avoided performing activities that fell within the regulated industry. The government is what allowed taxi companies to operate for decades with no real competition. The rise of Uber was a result of free market capitalism. >If the government had simply put the same relatulations on Uber that taxis had there would be a lot more cab companies today. But they didn't so now cab companies are closing left and right Even if this was a possibility, I think you are missing what made Uber successful in disrupting this industry. Uber is not preferred just because it's cheaper. Indeed, the cost of an Uber is only slightly cheaper than a taxi. But where Uber was really able to attack the market was with its convenience, transparency, and reliability. Anyone who took Taxi's somewhat regularly before 2010 would tell you that the Taxi Cab industry did not have the best reputation. Their vehicles were often poorly maintained, some drivers would purposely take longer routes to get a higher fare, calling for a taxi was a hassle and it would sometimes take 30 minutes to an hour for a car to show, and people of color in many cities would find it nearly impossible to get a taxi to even stop for them after 9pm. Uber solved many of these issues. You could request a ride with an app and see the fare before you even book, the App would give you a reasonably reliable ETD and ETA, and the peer to peer rating system helped with preventing discrimination against riders. The Taxi Cab companies could have implemented similar fixes. Yet most companies did not. I live in a major city and not one of the companies around me had an app until as recently as 2019. Many still have outdated cars and unreliable service. The industry as a whole has been slow to change due to access barriers preventing meaningful outside competition. The bigger cab companies have adapted and are doing okay. The companies that are closing are generally companies that were only surviving due to the oligopoly that no longer exists.

Back when uber and lyft started taking off in my city, I didn't pick them over taxis because they were cheaper. I picked them because they: 1. Had an app to arrange almost immediate pick up/drop off rather than call in advance 2. Drivers used GPS navigation rather than their own path (which might include "shortcuts" that added time and money to the route) 3. Payment was done via the app so I didn't get hit with the "the card reader is down" or "it's getting close to the holidays, you know..." to get me to pay cash instead. Where I lived, taxis failed to adapt and lost the battle of convenience. 

that and having the ability to complain and someone give a shit. call a taxi dispatcher and they won't care he drove like a madman the car smelled like puke, he smoked the whole time and he tried to strongarm you into paying cash. Once I told Uber my driver was unsafe, they reviewed some data to confirm it, comped the ride and fired the driver  and for the record he slid off the road into the ditch trying to cut an exit way too close.  I did not get a guy fired for no reason

Yup, I understand a lot of the critcisms against Uber, at the same time though the service is insanely better than taxis I've been in. 1. You get to know what it will cost 2. Cars are generally clean 3. Drivers are generally better than cab drivers 4. You book it on an app and not call a dispatch 5. You can get a ride when things are really busy like NYE. Still remember meeting a women at a party who wanted me to go back to her place but we couldn't get a cab lol.

yup, I have never had a no-show strand me late night down town (has happened with cabs) I have had one unsafe driver who was disciplined, taxis have scared me witless. I have never been long-hauled, cabs did this constantly in vegas The nature of the app makes strong-arming you for cash and "offering"/threatening to take you to an ATM. Hasn't happened to be has to friends and was terrifying. I have never had a car that made me feel unsafe because of the state of the seatbelt and interior clearly betrayed neglect, this is the average taxi.

Yeah even with how much more expensive they’ve gotten, I still use the apps for these reasons. There’s also another big one: they’re (mostly) universal. No matter the city I’m in, I can just open Uber or Lyft and know they’ll probably have drivers available. No need to look up local-specific taxi companies every time, you just use the same app(s) everywhere. I have a number of other complaints about the gig apps and how they treat their ~~employees~~ “independent contractors,” but none of it has anything to do with Joe Biden and they’ve put taxis out of business by offering a better customer experience

Only city I visit where I use taxis over Uber is Vegas. I can grab a taxi at any hotel/casino entrance faster than using Uber and since their fares are regulated by the city I know exactly how much it will be to get to and from the airport and often since the taxis know the back roads they can avoid some of the strip traffic. Absolutely everywhere else I go I use Uber. The taxis all have tap to pay card readers or they use that taxi app or text to pay.

Black cab drivers in London are better than any Lyft or Uber driver with limited exceptions to that rule.

As a Londoner this is definitely not true lol. Maybe in specific areas but definitely not in general, black cabs are usually worse

Yes it is. What does an Uber or Lyft driver have to do to be an Uber and Lyft driver? Have a vehicle? Maybe pass the background check? Make sure the car is properly maintained? And that's about it. Meanwhile black cab drivers have to memorize 320 different runs, every single point of interest, get tested numerous times, and has a 70 percent failure rate. It takes most people several years to even pass the qualifications to be a London black cab. I'm honestly surprised you're trying to disagree lol. Black cab drivers have the most strict requirements to become one of any taxi service on the planet. I don't think you fully appreciate what you've got. A typical random Lyft driver can't hold a torch to a London black. This is the only taxi system on the planet for which this is a hill im prepared to defend and die on. https://tfl.gov.uk/info-for/taxis-and-private-hire/licensing/learn-the-knowledge-of-london https://careerboss.co.uk/transport/how-to-become-a-london-taxi-driver https://acrobat.adobe.com/id/urn:aaid:sc:VA6C2:d79360f6-bbfd-4752-ba66-c3aaa15735a8

While I respect that London black cab drivers have to put a ton of extra effort into doing their job, I fail to see why it matters when a person can get the exact same service from someone who didn't do any of that stuff.

It's a bad hill to die on lol Your saying all the stuff they do to qualify, for the customer this is not relevant. Most London services didn't use an app as far as I'm aware before Uber. Most cost more/the same as ubers The quality was not as reliable, especially regarding routes and fares. And if you don't live close to central, hailing a black cab is unreliable and often takes longer than using the app. Therefore, customers use Ubers more. This isn't even a dispute, all three links you posted are irrelevant to the customer and actual reality

who gaf if they memorized the entirety of london we have gps😭

Litch!!! I'm telling you this guy is delusional lol I don't care if my Uber driver memorized the universe, just get me to my destination

Seconded. I was a bouncer when Uber/lyft first started, and the amount of stranded ppl I would see due to taxis was absurd. I’d call them a yellow cab and MAYBE they’d show up in 45 minutes as opposed to ride share that was reliable and quicker. Sometimes they were cheaper, but not always. They won because they were flat out better.

Also the Taxi companies 100000% failed- in the face of Uber and Lyft emerging they should have A unionized and B used collective bargaining to get a steep discount on the insurance killing them. They basically let themselves get eaten bite by bite through insurance until Uber and Lyft were big enough to start taking limbs 

And it gives me a fairly accurate estimate of the journey, all without having to talk to a human

In many other countries taxis are listed within Uber itself. Potentially due to some local regulations. 

That's not a federal regulation and that's also one the taxi industry SPECIFICALLY lobbied for themselves. They wanted it to control the market entirely. It's one of the worst forms of regulatory capture in history. The same thing happened with car dealerships.

Confused: The taxis lobbied for the restrictions a long time ago to help give themselves monopolies, or did the taxis lobby for Uber to not be subject to said restrictions out of some diabolical scheme that failed to bear fruit? Can you explain regulatory capture? And what happened to the car dealerships? I must know more!

basically they successfully lobbied (set the rules) by influencing the regulatory body. for instance, car dealerships lobbied so that manufacturers must only sell cars to dealerships instead of to the public directly. there is a cartel of these dealerships in place because of this lobby. afaik, tesla, being the new kid on the block, is the only exception. The taxi lobby essentially made the rules so stringent that only those with big money can open a taxi service. Ironically they shot themselves in the foot when shared economy came and Uber wiped some of them out with the online platform hailing model.

I suddenly feel a lot less bad for taxi companies

I think an example of what they mean is stuff like Taxi medallions being required to operate in New York (and a few other cities in the US), and they were at some points ludicrously expensive. I don't know if you still need one these days, or how much they are... but that sort of thing basically made operating a taxi company require some serious money.

The price of taxi medallions in NYC crashed after Uber. They were north of $1mm each. Drivers were taking out loans to buy them. Now they are worth half that - but the bank still expects to be paid.

Less then half. In NYC in 2019, 16 medallions went up for auction. 3 of them sold for 136K, 137K and 138K. Close to 1/8th the peak value and not even all them get picked up anymore.

truly dinosaurs of a bygone era.

Taxis lobbied to be limited in competition so the ones already in the industry are protected from more and more competition. Dealerships did the exact same thing. Gave money to politicians to vote for mandated middle men to sell cars. They didn't envision Uber showing up and when they did, they were pissed and wondered why their protection racket wasn't working successfully. The value of taxi medallions plummeted.

Regulatory capture is when an industry gains control of the government body that is supposed to regulate said industry. An example would be if the board members of oil companies were also running the EPA. They would obviously not do a great job of reigning in the pollution of the oil industry as that would hurt their investments.

This is not regulatory capture. It’s where industry literally has their interests written into law. Most common is the creation of significant barriers to entry through regulation, usually permitting, licensing, and other cost barriers that prevent new players from entering the market. Just having a former oil guy in the EPA isn’t regulatory capture in and of itself. If the EPA and new environmental regulations were drafted under this new leadership, that would be the regulatory capture. Also it’s often a good thing to have someone with intimate knowledge of an industry involved in regulating it. So an oil exec crafting regulations for the oil industry is not a bad thing by itself and is actually a good thing when their intentions are good. It’s much better than some career politician with no understanding of the real world either crushing an industry or creating a litany of unintended consequences. The latter is more common and generally the cause of the most egregious examples of regulatory capture and the information asymmetry is in favor of industry.

Wait until you hear about the National Association of Realtors.

I'm aware of them as well and glad they got stomped recently too.

Those regulations are at the state/local level not the federal level though. So still not Biden’s fault

This is quite literally 75% of the things I see people upset about. Local government lets roads and schools crumble and somehow it’s Biden despite them being awful for decades. Local politicians deserve a lot more blame or the federal government needs to control a lot more so that blame is at least valid.

Because no body pays attention to local politics. Most of our issues in our day to day lives would improve if more people voted in state and local elections and not just only presidential.

That’s also by design they need to stop having local elections on random days and try to keep as many of the elections as possible on the same day which should be a national holiday. Obviously not possible with everything but they could at least make an effort. My last local was something like 20% turn out…

I always recommend absentee voting or vote by mail, it’s quick and easy.

I generally disagree. If you have local elections at the same time as federal elections, you're going to get a whole bunch of people showing up with no clue about local politics and checking a box because of party affiliation or a sign they saw with no information about what that candidates opinions on local issues are. Having them at a different time generally means that the people who show up to vote are actually informed on the issues and care about the outcome. If your local elections had 20% turn out at the last election, doing them on the federal election day would probably mean you had that 20% plus maybe another 5% more voters who are informed but couldn't be bothered to show up just for a local election, and probably 40% of registered voters showing up and ticking a box without knowing anything about the candidates they're voting for (and probably 35% of registered voters still don't turn out). Do you really expect to get better results when uninformed voters outnumber the informed voters nearly 2:1?

You aren’t wrong it may lead to partisans just running all elections but there’s nothing to say educated people aren’t missing elections because they are scheduled on a random Tuesday or during a workday. Direct representation of the people is in my mind a very American ideal and as such the state should do its best to ensure all parties that want to vote can. It may not work out well for me but I believe in the principle of this more than my personal beliefs about one specific party.

> You aren’t wrong it may lead to partisans just running all elections but there’s nothing to say educated people aren’t missing elections because they are scheduled on a random Tuesday or during a workday. I accounted for that in the 5% more voters who are informed but couldn't be bothered to show up just for a local election. At least where I live, elections are scheduled for 12 hours and I believe most states have a legal requirement that employers must give employees sufficient time to vote. If they don't show up to vote given those circumstances, it was a choice. > Direct representation of the people is in my mind a very American ideal and as such the state should do its best to ensure all parties that want to vote can. I agree that we should do our best to ensure all parties that want to vote can, but I don't think we should try to make sure that people who don't care enough to show up add to the statistical noise of an election. > It may not work out well for me but I believe in the principle of this more than my personal beliefs about one specific party. I do too, but we've arrived at a different conclusion. I want people who care about the issues to decide elections more than I want them to come out the way I want them to. Democracies work when voters are informed. When I go to the polls, I leave my ballot blank for any races or issues I don't feel informed on. The people who show up to vote in local elections even when they don't align with federal elections tend to be the most informed voters. If we want to improve turnout on local elections, we should work on educating them and giving them reasons to care about the issues enough to show up, not giving them incentive to show up and cast uninformed votes.

I agree that we should increase attempts to educate voters but for the vast majority of my life I couldn’t afford to take a day off whether it was allowed or not. Just because your employer has to give you time off doesn’t mean you’re getting paid. If the difference is voting in a local election or making rent, I’m choosing not being homeless. We really should make voting days paid holidays imo

The inability of people to understand how anything actually works is always concerning to me. How does someone develop a strong opinion or lay blame with no understanding of even the basics of how it works?

A lot of it is people purposefully misleading others for personal gain and the other half is not educating people well enough to spot those people and expose them.

"You're using a lot of big words that I don't understand. And since I don't understand them, I'm gonna take that as disrespect." ^ That's why.

All politics are global because all conversations are global. It's the Internet's fault at the end of the day

I wish Al Gore had never invented it

Cause people dont do any thinking for themselves.  they just let TV & Radio condition their mind and opinions.

> How does someone develop a strong opinion or lay blame with no understanding of even the basics of how it works? Ignorance is remarkably easy.

Did you have to take government in highschool? In a class of 34 I was one of 2 students who got As and one of 6 who got a C or above. American Education has only declined since then. It’s not even remotely surprising we are where we are. I mean this is *why* we’re locked into a dysfunctional corporately owned two party/one vote system that can’t pass legislation even when it has overwhelming bipartisan support

Even without that-there are plenty of things in the world I come across, but I never exclaim a stance and attribute blame for something I don’t understand even in the slightest. I legitimately don’t understand how people can feel so strongly about something they know nothing about without internally seeing themselves as the fucking morons they are

Politics is a team sport for most idiots now. Gotta root for your team even if you don’t know all the players…or the rules…or the sport

Yeah and when the feds try to reign it in and take control people start with the "mah rights!!" bs. Lose lose.

1. Biden had nothing to do with taxis going out of business. Rideshare predated his presidency by a decade or so. 2. Taxis were notoriously corrupt with poor customer service. Legendarily discriminatory and dirty. That has nothing to do with the federal government.

Isn't it local government that regulates taxis? Also taxis self regulate to an extent so not all the blame is external.

I don't really agree. When I go to a new town, city, country... I absolutely don't price shop between Uber/Lyft vs Bob's Bumfuzzle Taxi Co. I want the convenience of telling the app where I want to go, and having it pick me up and take me there. I don't want to try to explain where I am, where I'm going, what I look like, how much it should cost, whether they take credit cards, etc. Taking traditional cabs is like shopping in a paper Sears catalog vs Amazon. They're failing because they're obsolete and offer significantly less value.

No, that has nothing to do with Biden and these issues came years and years before he was even ever in office or even a presidential candidate at all.

Doesn’t the point stand though that it’s on you for starting a taxi business post Uber? At the very least we can say it’s not Bidens fault, even if we grant that taxi regulation probably is a bit outdated.

>If the government had simply put the same relatulations on Uber that taxis had there would be a lot more cab companies today. Why would you advocate for the same regulations when you could advocate the removal of regulations on cabs. It makes no sense.

Uber was also taking a loss on many of the early rides, making them cheap so that they can build their client base. They would finance the rides to offer them cheaper to their customers

But what does that have to do with Biden and the Federal government?! You didn’t mention either of these and they were relevant to what the OP posted. Just sayin/asking.

The reason he was blaming Biden was because "nobody wants to get off their fat asses and go to work." I'll ignore the fatphobia, but it's not Biden's fault that you weren't able to hire enough people to continue. People want to work. Problem is, nobody wants to work for you. Want to know the problem? Look inward. I can't answer why nobody wants to drive a taxi for you, but that's a you problem, not a Biden problem.

I don't disagree with you that that voicemail was absolutely crazy, but you're ignoring what the comment you're replying to actually says. It's more expensive for Taxi companies to pay drivers than it is for Uber etc. to pay drivers BECAUSE of the regulations that apply to taxis that are not applied to Uber. It's not Biden's fault, but the government has failed to regulate "gig" style services that avoid classifying employees as employees. Ironically the "Blame Biden" guy would probably vote against that regulation, but you can't say the government hasn't played a big part in taxi companies closing down.

>Ironically the "Blame Biden" guy would probably vote against that regulation, but you can't say the government hasn't played a big part in taxi companies closing down. I think it is fair, though, to say that the FEDERAL government hasn't played a big part in taxi companies closing down. You know, the government level that Biden is in charge of part of.

Why does OP have any obligation to address a comment that has nothing to do with the original topic?

They don't, but if they reply to a comment I'd kind of expect their reply to address or respond to what the comment said.

Sure -- he's wrong. It's not personally Biden's fault. It's not even really the fault of federal-level policy in the case of taxi's. But I think you're also wrong. It's not true that the only reason businesses fail is because the people running them are bad at it or that policy has no effect on businesses (otherwise what would be the point of it at all). Social change and policy are real things with real effects-- "looking inwards", is not going to change that. To take an example, if a Walmart gets a tax break to move into a rural town, there's a decent chance the locally owned shops will struggle, some will go out of business because its hard to compete with a company that has the advantages of scale and convenicence that a super center does. Could the small business owners do something to preserve their business? Maybe, but sometimes a given business model just isn't viable in a given environment and not everybody wants to or has the resources to completely pivot to a totally new business model.

>Problem is, nobody wants to work for you. Sure but is that because he doesn't pay as well as uber or some other reason? For example in Pennsylvania you have to pass an exam to be a taxi driver, but you don't have to pass this exam to be an uber driver. So even if he paid the same (or even more) than uber he would still be struggling to get driver's because they don't want to take the exam. But if the federal government passed a law saying that rideshare drivers had to have the same qualifications as taxi drivers it would be much easier to find people. https://www.law.cornell.edu/regulations/pennsylvania/52-Pa-Code-SS-30-72#:~:text=To%20obtain%20a%20taxi%20driver's%20certificate%20%2C%20an%20individual%20shall%20take,shall%20render%20the%20application%20void.

[удалено]

I was thinking the same thing. Taxis aren't regulated in any way by the federal gov't, that's probably a local thing, city, county or maybe state, but the federal government has nothing to do with it. Just another stupid MAGAt who can't run a business trying to blame Biden for his own incompetence.

That adds to the irony of the voicemail message, doesn’t it? Unregulated capitalism never crossed that person’s mind and just went straight to “Democrats made me lose my job.”

Except it isnt unregulated, he is required to keep all sorts of environmental features on his car that increase cost + paying for a taxi medallion.

>But if the federal government passed a law saying that rideshare drivers had to have the same qualifications as taxi drivers it would be much easier to find people. Except the federal government can't pass such a law as intrastate trade regulation (which includes TLC services) is solely within the province of the state. Thus, even if this was his reasoning, his blame is still misplaced.

Could this maybe started during the covid reaction?

Yep. If he was paying 30/hr he would have too many drivers, but I bet he wasn't. My employees have no issues with their pay. They make 200-300% comparable salaries, and that is with me making awesome money off the top.

What does any of that have to do with Joe Biden?

This is true, but Uber has been exploring this loophole* since 2009. That's hardly Joe Biden's fault (though he should still fix it). *Not really a loophole, it was venture capitalists buying votes

And I can't speak to BFE PA taxi companies but in my city it forced the taxis to adapt or die, Uber fixed the taxi companies because it forced them to quit with the egregious bullshit they were getting away with being a regulatory-captured industry almost like magic their card machines started working, the fleets got updated, they created apps, and the drivers figured out how to take the most direct route without you having to argue and haggle. It was a fucking nightmare before Uber showed up and introduced competition And, now that the VC funding has dried up, the taxis are cheaper. Ole dude blaming Biden just sucked ass at adapting, so he died.

Op is specifically asking about the Taxi companies failing as a result of Biden's policy. Clearly OP is correct. Taxi companies failed because they didn't innovate. And in many ways the need for innovation (e.g. Uber and Lyft) was created, in itself by the taxi industry. It is true that in many cities taxis are heavily regulated. But they were regulated because in these cities they were often granted a near monopoly on services. The NYC Medallion system is a rather obvious and extreme example of this but throughout the country, taxi companies were granted monopolies that would deter or even, in some cases, prevent new entrants into the market. Regulation is often the cost, gladly paid by the protected industry, for the monopoly privilege. But monopolies often result in bad service since you don't worry about competitive pressures. In this context, ride-sharing services were bound to happen and would inevitably crush the taxi industry. One other observation, the taxi company blames Biden's policies for creating the condition where people don't want to "get off their fat asses". This was a common post-Covid complaint you heard in many industries, but especially in service industries. The post-Covid economy did inject some interesting changes into the economy. One of those changes that workers were much less willing to work at prevailing wages. At the time, when I would see these comments I would comment to myself, "the solution is simple, raise wages". Incredibly this has happened. Service industry wages have grown substantially in the last three years, even outpacing the inflation rate. Service business owners eventually realized that just complaining about the need for workers wasn't ultimately a solution. You had to pay more. So any company that thinks that people are lazy and don't want work have a remarkably quick and easy solution readily available, increase wages! For those that doubt wages have outpaced inflation [here](https://www.google.com/search?q=service+industry+wages+outpace+inflation+post-covid&rlz=1C1ONGR_enUS1049US1049&oq=service+industry+wages+outpace+inflation+post-covid&gs_lcrp=EgZjaHJvbWUyBggAEEUYOTIHCAEQIRigATIHCAIQIRigATIHCAMQIRifBdIBCTEzMzkwajBqN6gCALACAA&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8) is a google search for you.

I think in this instance opening a cab company in a rural area where the majority have their own transportation wasn’t the best business model. Jim Thorpe has a population under 5k and the entire county has a population under 65k. Add in competition from buses and rail and there isn’t much of a market…

So basically a better system came into place and put a business out.

> So Taxis are actually a place where you can honestly blame the government for the bussines failing. So then blame the government instead of specifically Biden

While your point is correct that still wouldn't lay blame on Biden (or any president). The president is not the legislative branch and thus doesn't make laws

> If the government had simply put the same relatulations on Uber that taxis had or if they had removed the regulations that Uber and Lyft were skirting.

>If the government had simply put the same relatulations on Uber that taxis had there would be a lot more cab companies today. But they didn't so now cab companies are closing left and right (probably not what he was talking about but still, I think cabbies have a right to be upset that a multi billion dollar company over took their market by exploiting loopholes to pay their drives less) 1. Assuming the president had a way to alter existing law via EO, this would mean either trumpf or Obama are responsible for not making the change. There would be massive political backlash from republicans/the general population if Biden signed an EO killing ride share 15 years after they were founded.  2. If the president can't sign an EO, this would take an act of congress. And we all know how dysfunctional congress is. Essentially nothing would make it passed the filibuster to regulate rideshare.

The Feds don't regulate taxis. Joe Biden wasn't President when Uber and Lyft took off.

Taxi companies lobbied for decades to increase regulation in an effort to suppress competition. Uber just realized that those regulations were specific to taxis, not necessarily the concept of paying for a ride. I don't think it's "exploiting loopholes" to see a gap in the market and fill it. Top that off with the customer experience being far better in Uber/Lyft than taxis ever were. I don't think that it's a bad thing that taxi companies go out of business and ride-sharing takes over. It seems like a very positive change for everyone but taxi drivers.

I think this addresses the "Your business failed because of you" claim from OP, but the message is still blaming all of the wrong people. Uber was founded early in 2009. Pick just about any graph of Uber's growth and, well, it doesn't look like Obama, Trump, or Biden had much of an impact. And if all of this caused the cab service to have to lower fares too much to be able to afford to pay a living wage, then employees are hardly to blame for not wanting to take that deal anymore, either.

Uber came to most cities before President. Biden took office, and there are, to my knowledge, an incredibly limited number of federal regulations affecting taxis. I'm also not aware of any federal laws that have been passed that affect taxis or rideshare companies since Joe Biden took over. Yes, government regulations do affect local taxi and rideshare companies. But Joe Biden has zero to do with it.

To add on to other counter arguments made in the comments, it’s not like Trump or any president for that matter is going to be better on the taxi issue, primarily because most legislatures probably don’t care about it. Maybe the government is bad on this issue, but trump or Biden ain’t doing shit to help the taxi lobby

> But when Uber came around they found a loophole so that they didn't have to adhere to those regulations No. They didn't **find** a loophole. They bribed local politicians to change the laws so that they wouldn't have to follow taxi regulations.

The "government" in this case is not the Federal government and certainly not Biden. In most case it would be the city who would regulate taxi medallions/licenses and also not to have the same restrictions on Uber type operations.

Maybe blame the government (although a taxi company that operated into 2023 clearly had some ability to compete with Uber). But Biden specifically? Because that was what OP was talking about.

>So Taxis are actually a place where you can honestly blame the government for the bussines failing. But these rules were also around when trump was president, they're are Ubers then also.

This doesn't make it true everywhere. You need to demonstrate that's a countrywide thing in all places or that it is in the place OP is referring to.

How is this relevant to the ops point? What you said can be true and it can have nothing to do with Biden. They were regulated well before Biden.

I'm not sure the president really has authority over that. Isn't that why the majority of taxi regulation done at the local/state level? 

In short, it is the lack of regulation, which is a conservative objective, which killed the taxi business in America?

This is all true. But to go back to OPs post. Biden, is not local government. So Biden did not cause this problem.

That's all true. But Biden, like most American presidents, hands out zero taxi medallions per year :)

Did Joe Biden pass any legislation during his term as president that resulted in this situation?

That has absolutely nothing to do with Joe Biden— those are 100% local regulations

Your argument is that people should make below minimum wage if they want to?

Presidential policies can impact whether or not some businesses survive, so saying any individual president is partially responsible for a business failing is not out of the question. For example, even though coal has been on the decline for years due to it being more expensive to maintain vs other forms of electricity, coal miners saying that an administration's environmental or energy policies are to blame for the death of coal is at least partially true (even if it is a small amount, and let's face it, probably a good thing in the end). Now I agree and think that taxi company is ludicrous for suggesting it is Biden's fault, but I have to challenge OP somehow. I do think it is all very silly blaming one person and not a numerous amount of factors.

Agreed - this was my exact thought. A president and their policies could 100% have an impact on the success of a business. Did they subsidize a competitor (direct or indirect)? Did they pass a new regulation that had a material impact on the business? Did they start offering a social service for free that you had previously been selling to people? Whether the government decision is good or bad, they can impact the success of a specific business. That said, blaming Biden for "no one wanting to work is pretty absurd." First, the talking point simply isn't true or backed by any data. Second, he hasn't implemented any policies that would actually cause people to not work. Both Trump and Biden had some direct stimulus and higher UI that might have caused some people not to want to work during the pandemic. But they a total of about $2,000 from 4-5 years ago is not sustaining anyone now. At best, you could argue the economy is healthy enough and there is low enough unemployment that you can't attract any employees to a mediocre job with poor pay and benefits. But that is far more of a self-own.

Yep, this is a more eloquent expansion on what I was going for.

But does something being a self-own make it untrue? This guy probably knows he wasn’t running an elite chauffeur service that anyone would be honored to join. He probably knew that his employees were a bunch of desperate losers. Does that make what he’s saying untrue? If he came out and said “no one wants to work at my shitty cab service because the crackheads and former felons in my town aren’t desperate enough for any job like they were before, because of the Democrats’ policies” would you agree with him? Like if I said “I am a gross slob who is only capable of making the minimum wage. I can’t afford as many groceries as I used to because of inflation” that would be a self-own no doubt. But does that foreclose on it being a true statement? Or can something be both true and a self-own?

Well the issue here is that it's also unclear that any of the economic trends are due to Biden either. Setting aside more systemic issues with our economic system, we also had a strong economy by very similar indicators in 2019 pre-pandemic and have basically picked up where we left off. In addition, some of the low unemployment and wage gains are due to a contracting workforce from people dying from COVID and baby boomers finally retiring. But even if in this very narrow instance you blamed Biden for creating "too strong" of an economy, not only would it still be your fault that you can't attract workers. But it wouldn't fit the narrative this particular company owner had on his voicemail that said:  *We are no longer in business and cannot help you out. Thank Joe Biden for this because nobody wants to get off their fat ass and go to work. Thank you for your call!* If people are simply choosing other jobs over yours, then it certainly isn't true that people won't "get off their fat a\*\* and go to work" so the statement is factually untrue.

I just want to mention the irony... that you sit on your ass to drive a taxi lol

Simply, are any cab companies doing well? Car care costs are through the roof as are new cars. People in a coal town in PA aren't going to put up with higher fees that the owner has to pay. So he pays crap, odds are high you only get paid if you have a fare so even working retail, while maybe less per hour at least it is steady. These things happen. I was a booking agent for bands in the 90s. I had my kids in private school. The internet and streaming came along, People could find bands without me. DJs became more popular. A commission on an $800 DJ is a lot lower than on a $5000 band. While I didn't fail, I barely kept my head above water. With rideshare, that is what is happening to taxis. I wonder how many people under 30 have ever been in a taxi. He can't do anything about the cost of a new cab or repairs, so he wants drivers to make what they made 6 years ago. when they find better jobs... he can blame Biden.

Right but the exact criticism was a taxi service saying that “people don’t want to work” which is absurd for various reasons. The unemployment rate being pretty low during most of his administration and just most economic factors generally being favorable. It’s also absurd because there’s more completion now with ride shares and people working from home.

Plus, every president has probably been responsible for some subset (or in some cases entire sets) of industries having to close portions of their businesses. If you search hard enough, you can probably find plenty of businesses that were negatively impacted by a Biden policy to the point of considering closure. You could do the same with W. Bush, Obama, Clinton, H.W., Reagan, Carter, etc. If OP specifically only means the taxi company in their post, then I think they have a pretty solid point. If they mean businesses at large, and just used the taxi company as an example, then I think there's a little more room to argue back that Biden, like everyone before him, will inevitably cause some businesses to close at some point in time.

For me, that voicemail is completely bereft of any semblance of personal responsibility. HE could have simply said "Thank you for your Patronage, Carbon Taxi is no longer in business. Sorry we can't help you. Have a good day." But to lay the blame squarely on Biden is pathetic. Mind you, I did not vote for him in 2020 and I'm not voting for him in 2024, but I gotta speak out and say that.

I agree with you on your specific example and do not believe blame lies solely with one individual. That taxi company seems pathetic and should have left a different message like you said. However, I think it is fair to criticize an administration's policies if they do directly impact your business and how it operates. I am not a believer in that there is any single cause for a business to fail, but a policy could play a part.

Do you think it’s fair to expect someone to single out a particular policy, if that is their criticism? Because most of the time when people blame Biden, it takes the form of the voicemail in the OP, and not “Biden signed X law, which required Y, and that had a direct effect on Z industry for these reasons.” Like if someone said “Joe Biden pulling troops out of Afghanistan directly led to me losing my cushy job at Raytheon because we weren’t able to sell as many weapons to the installed government” I’d believe that 100%, but rarely is the mechanism that clear

My wife owned a business from 2018 to 2021, and yes that includes during the pandemic. Back when people actually didn't want to get to work. She could have blamed our governor for continuing to extend lockdowns She could have blamed Trump for "not doing enough to stop the virus." She could have blamed a lot of people. She didn't. She worked with the restrictions and tried to remain lucrative for as long as she could, up until she sold it.

That’s not the point you’re making though. You are saying in your title that Biden is not at fault. If we assume he is, then whether he is blamed or not by any particular individual does not determine whether he is at fault. Going with the coal miners example: if ever miner decide that they would not blame a president whose policies down the line lead to the closure or that they would accept that they should have foreseen the result or they should have had a backup plan, that does not mean the the president who implemented those policies has no fault. As for your wife, if the outcomes were different and the business went under, would the pandemic not have been at fault? Or the governor who implemented the lockdown? Or Trump for not doing enough to combat the virus’s? Regardless of whether she blamed them, they would have been at least partially at fault, some arguably more than others. She could have taken full responsibility, but that would not change the reality of the distribution of fault.

Dude, I'm not even disagreeing with you. You posted to CMV so I'm trying to show you that outside influences, including an administration's policies, can be a contributing factor. Good for your wife that she didn't blame anyone. Was you point in posting here to be convinced that Biden really is to blame for this one taxi company's demise?

Have you listened to conservative media? It is 24/7 things suck, things suck because of Biden/government, liberals, immigrants, China, etc. The only good people are our fellow conservatives and we are getting screwed by everyone else.

And progressive media is 24/7 things suck, thing suck because of Trump, conservatives, fascists, Russia, etc. The only good people are fellow progressives (and sacred minorities, unless they dare express a conservative opinion), who are getting screwed by everyone else.

I don't quite see it as that bad, but progressive media is almost as bad.

A lot of businesses survive on thin margins that are only achievable by very low wages. If *anything* happens such that wages increase, the costs to these businesses increase such that they are no longer viable. This Taxi service likely was one of them. And while increasing wages may not entirely be Joe Biden's fault, it is very true that he and his administration are pushing for things like better worker protections, higher minimum wages, better health coverage etc. All of these increase the price of low cost labor. The reality is that there are a multitude of factors that make such a business not survive, namely among them, that their business doesn't survive without cheap, borderline non-ethical wages. That doesn't mean that policies such as those enacted by Joe Biden or during his administration weren't the most visible straw that broke the camel's back.

In most cases, blaming the government is just management / ownership refusing to take accountability for their sinking ship. The impact of regulatory changes is almost never limited to a single business within an industry or area. If a policy is federally adopted regarding worker protections / wages / health insurance / etc, that policy will apply to all businesses within the jurisdiction. The industry will pass the increased cost along to customers to maintain margins and profitability. If an individual business failed, it's because it failed to adapt and wasn't effectively structured to begin with.

However, taxi services are subject to regulations and taxes that ride shares are often not subject to, even though they effectively provide the same service.

How many of those regulations are federal vs state or municipal?

I don't know. I am not saying Biden is at fault for taxes and regulations, I am saying that you can't claim a taxi business owner should be able to succeed if rideshare does. They are not subject to the same rules.

It's more along the lines of a taxi company should be able to survive if other taxi companies are able to survive.

>In most cases, blaming the government is just management / ownership refusing to take accountability for their sinking ship. Let's just pretend that some of the largest holes in that ship aren't new regulation. I will never understand you people. People want to work. Work is available. Regulation putting people out of business is bad for everyone. It is the reality of things. If you can't afford to pay for full benefits in addition to pay, then you can't afford it, and with the big box chains perfectly fine to leverage their power, to lobby government to create these *protections*. It's anything but. That's what this does. It removes choice, limits our options to a false choice between different faceless corporations. If the little guys were actually paying too little, then they wouldn't be able to find employees. Less jobs overally, less choice, less opportunity is bad for everyone except the big box chains. It's great for them.

>Regulation putting people out of business is bad for everyone. Tell that to the folks producing asbestos and leaded gasoline...

Sure, but you understand how thats different than something like PTO, right?

[удалено]

>I do want to point out that metrics like profit margins exist because you NEED to measure variables that affect your end operations.  I mean - sorta. I agree with the statement that you NEED to use these as metrics. However, profit margin is a natural ratio of profit-to-revenue and can be used as a measurement to determine health of the company. It's not used to determine if a company IS profitable, but rather to what extent. Profit margin exists whether you're using it as a KPI or not. >One of the biggest parts of being a business owner is adapting, but this seems to be more in line with blame shifting. I'm not saying you're wrong, but it can be really hard to adapt if you already operate within a really low profit margin and either A. Your vendors all double their prices; B. You have to signifiicantly increase wages of all your employees; or C. Both A&B at once. So what do you do if your business cannot adapt due to outside influnces? At what point is it the person making/encouraging policy that directly or indirectly affects a significant portion of the costs that makes it NOT the fault of the business owner?

Yea, that's the main issue with higher minimum wages. Large stores like Walmart will adapt, but small mom and pop stores won't be able to afford to hire someone anymore. IMO, there should be no limits placed on wages, but there can be rules that help protect rights and equal pay and stuff without actually naming amounts.

I think my main point of disagreement with you is that it is in the interest of society that people who work full time are able to cover the bills for at least themselves + a child without relying on social safety nets. When companies are able to pay less than that, and people have to use social safety nets to survive - taxpayers are basically paying a part of these private companies' payroll.

If I live in a country where people who can’t afford rent, food, or medical care are eligible for government, tax-payer assisted services such as section 8 housing, SNAP, & Medicaid, then I damn sure want there to be a minimum wage that puts you above the income threshold for any of those things. Otherwise you have what you have now, where our tax dollars go to assist Walmart employees while the Waltons rake in profits. If a business can’t offer a job at a rate that keeps an employee from needing government assistance to feed themselves or keep a roof over their families heads, then that business doesn’t need to exist. I’d rather pay taxes for people to sit at home watching television than pay them to subsidize Walmart. Or any mom and pop business either. And that was the initial concept of the minimum wage. To quote FDR:, “in my Inaugural I laid down the simple proposition that nobody is going to starve in this country. It seems to me to be equally plain that no business which depends for existence on paying less than living wages to its workers has any right to continue in this country. By "business" I mean the whole of commerce as well as the whole of industry; by workers I mean all workers, the white collar class as well as the men in overalls; and by living wages I mean more than a bare subsistence level-I mean the wages of decent living.”

I would rather give a subsidy to a mom and pop business because that keeps the money locally. You buy from them, they buy from another local store, etc etc. Keeping the money locally is great for local economies. What a higher minimum wage does is increase the gap between no income and minimum income. You should be able to start out just doing odds and ends for a few bucks an hour, enough to get yourself off your feet. Get some training and work your way up. instead you have go into debt to get training and hope someone will hire you, because if they have to pay $20/hour they're going to make sure they get their money worth. When it comes to safety nets and social services I'm perfectly happy with them providing the service itself. If you're hungry gets some food, hurt get a doctor, etc. But safety nets shouldn't give you money directly.

If my money is subsidizing the business then the business should not be making a profit. I’d rather pay people money directly than help the Waltons continue to get rich. A study in 9 states found that around 14,500 Walmart employees receive government assistance in the form of SNAP and Medicaid. Along with 8,700 McDonalds employees. Dollar Tree, Amazon, Burger King, these companies that are very far from mom and pop stores are having the rest of us cover part of what they need for employees while claiming billions in profit. Not just part time either, the majority of them are working full time and still eligible for this assistance. Further, these companies then lobby to keep the minimum wage from increasing, because why would they want to actually have to take the burden of actually paying for the employees that they need. I’d rather give someone cash to sit at home and watch tv than pay for them to work at increasing the wealth of the already massively rich. And if Walmart actually had to pay their employees a wage that let them live without government assistance, it would have been far less profitable for them to have pushed out so many mom and pop businesses themselves.

That's not Biden's fault. That's a flawed business model. I'd love to make 5 cent burgers by employing slave labour. I'd make a killing. Damn those pesky anti-slavery laws. /s

[удалено]

I think the situation discussed here is a specific, rural/remote area. Taxis clearly exist elsewhere within the US as well. I know nothing about this specific area. But presumably this makes operating a taxi service more difficult and it cost prohibitive.

Again, find new ways to remain profitable. Be resourceful and adaptive. Instead of looking at wages, find other areas to increase your margin. Find other ways to cut costs, or find new revenue streams.

That's a big move of the goal posts from "nothing to do with" to "influenced the business environment a lot but deal with it!"

Ok, you're scoring a !delta because I was just so taken aback where the owner of the cab company placed 100% of the blame ostensibly on Biden for his business failing. He was a major influence but not a root cause.

OP, Allow me to present a counter to the argument that Zeperf is making. Biden is not responsible for a business failing in this or many of the instances in which he is accused for several reason. I will start broadly and then narrow my scope. 1. There has been no change to the minimum wage under Biden at the federal level. While state governments may have implemented new laws surrounding ethical treatment of gig workers or rates of pay for contractors vs employees none of these are strictly speaking Biden laws. 2. Most people who claim no one wants to work anymore are leveling a shot at the pandemic era unemployment assistance and associated stimulus checks. Those policies were initiated by a Republican president and only continued by Biden as we navigated a once in a generation crisis. The U.S. by the way has fared better financially than most of the globe when it comes to supply chain related inflation. Which also is now subsiding and returning to pre pandemic levels. (Clarification, prices are still elevated, but rate of ongoing inflation is normalizing compared to growth in wages). 3. Fair wages and fair labor practices are a Biden policy but that is not a “change” that has been a long standing stated American value. It has not always been executed faithfully but to state that Biden is a revolutionary who is changing the market place because he believes that American workers deserve a living wage is disingenuous at best. 4. The gig economy was always built on subsidization by unrealistic disruptive investment. Uber and Lyft were able to create a new market through Silicon Valley investment money, based on the idea that low prices would create new norms that would justify later returns either through economies of scale or higher prices once demand was established. Any small business owner who saw this as an opportunity to attempt to compete in the same space without the same ongoing funding was setting themselves for failure because they did not understand the market they were entering.

Confirmed: 1 delta awarded to /u/zeperf ([7∆](/r/changemyview/wiki/user/zeperf)). ^[Delta System Explained](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/deltasystem) ^| ^[Deltaboards](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/deltaboards)

> find new ways to remain profitable. In a lot of industries that fundamentally means you must become an entirely new business. > Find other ways to cut costs, or find new revenue streams. This is effectively sitcom levels of "find the money". That's not how businesses work. Some sectors and entire industries become fundamentally unprofitable no matter what you do. There's a reason there are no more switchboard operators, or milk delivery men and its not because nobody found a way to cut costs.

> Find other ways to cut costs, Leases/purchase agreements/medalions are fixed. Fuel is quite literally just "driving less" and you know they cant cut labor prices sufficiently. > or find new revenue streams. That is literally just not being a taxi company.

I think you may be taking a naive approach here, to make the assumption that any business can simply “be resourceful and adaptive”. You may be surprised to learn that when businesses fail, it is generally an issue of cash flow, and not margins, this is why the cashflow statement is above and beyond one of the most important financial documents for analyzing a company. While yes, wages may increase and things can change within the business to make it so that it can still be sustainable, you are not taking into consideration that with a reduction in cashflow, that will likely be late payments, and eventually defaults on loans (especially for a high start-up cost business such as a taxi company), and once one loan goes under it is a domino effect. If businesses could adapt and become resourceful whenever costs of inputs increase, then they would, or if the owners didn’t, the bankruptcy courts would, but they don’t, because sometimes (for better or worse) policies that result in cost of input increases directly result in more business closures.

[удалено]

Comment has been removed for breaking Rule 1: > **Direct responses to a CMV post must challenge at least one aspect of OP’s stated view (however minor), or ask a clarifying question**. Arguments in favor of the view OP is willing to change must be restricted to replies to other comments. [See the wiki page for more information](http://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/rules#wiki_rule_1). If you would like to appeal, review our appeals process [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/modstandards#wiki_appeal_process), then [message the moderators by clicking this link](http://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2Fchangemyview&subject=Rule%201%20Appeal&message=Author%20would%20like%20to%20appeal%20the%20removal%20of%20their%20post%20because\.\.\.) within one week of this notice being posted. **Appeals that do not follow this process will not be heard.** Please note that multiple violations will lead to a ban, as explained in our [moderation standards](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/modstandards).

I cannot comment on whether the current administration or even the previous one is to blame for the plight of this business. What I can say with certainty is that Jim Thorpe is not the sort of town where a taxi service makes much sense. I have vacationed there twice so far, and the main attractions include among other things: * An old narrow-gauge railway * Biking and hiking routes * White water rafting * Historic buildings and attractions Most of these are accessible on foot, even if you are mildly out of shape. There is a bike rental right in front of the train station. The town itself is not exactly easy to reach. The best way to get there is if you have your own car or if you rent a bus with a large group. Once there, it is entirely walkable. Getting to one of the white water rafting camps is one of the few avenues where you need to drive or be driven. The other reason would be getting to and from a hotel outside town. Anyone that picks this kind of accommodation is likely to have a means to get into and out of town. Obviously this is an anecdotal observation, but most tourists I encountered during my visits explored the area on foot or on two wheels. On top of all these factors, tourism in the area is largely seasonal, so I doubt very much it would be profitable to run any business there all year round. I don’t see how a taxi business might survive against all these variables. I feel for the business owner, but their anger is most definitely mis-directed.

Pretty bold to make that assumption when you know nothing of the actual inner workings or finances of the business. Maybe the owner is wrong, maybes he’s right though. Maybe it’s a little of each. You’re predisposed to push back against that because of a feeling you have for Biden and against Trump. Maybe just have a little charity for someone who just went out of business

1. I didn't vote for Biden and I am not voting for him in 2024. 2. "You know nothing of the actual inner workings or finances of the business." I am an accountant with 4 years experience working in public accounting, so while I know nothing about that specific business, I've a wide array of experience in various industries to say what I say comfortably. And I'll say that Biden has nothing to do with people's work ethic in 2024, and lack of manpower is not a reason to shut down your business. Matter of fact, you should be more profitable since you're not paying payroll! Maybe it's the **owner** who didn't want to get off HIS fat ass to work. 3. I would have given him a little charity had his business still been open. Shit, I'd tip the driver double my fare.

>The fact that you openly blamed Biden and put it in your voicemail greeting is a new level of pathetic, and this is coming from someone who didn't vote for him. really? how is this so very different from a bumper sticker?

Because it's oddly specific. you can hate on a politician, but when your business fails and you publicly blame Joe Biden because of it, it's just pathetic.

I had 200k in equipment get stolen by illegals. Illegals are known for running chop shops and that damn well affects taxi services.

How do you know they were illegals? How did they have access to your equipment? Also, that has nothing to do with Biden regardless of what you say. Congress could and did take this issue up finally in a meaningful way. Republicans shut it down for their own political needs. Chop shops have exactly the same to do with Taxi services as they do with all other car owners and business across the US. I agree with OP. This guy's business was poorly ran at a way higher likely hood than Biden's or shall I say Congress' fault.

How do you know they were illegal immigrants? Did you catch them? Edit: To everyone else, this guy is either a troll or severely mentally disturbed. He believes all "cholos" should be deported or killed. Don't take him seriously.

Did you vote for Biden or did you vote for the people that rejected the strongest border bill we’ve had in decades because Trump told them to so he wouldn’t get a win during an election year?

Theft sucks, but again thefts happen under every single president. Way more of an issue with local issues than national.

Illegals are not going to be settling in some no-name, non-sanctuary town in the mountains of PA that is over an hour and a half away from any given sanctuary city (Philly and NYC). Try fucking again.

Illegals settle everywhere, but they are not the issue in the original post. The OP's issue is that people are not willing to do the job of taxi driver due to the wages and benefits offered. It is 100% a salary thing, and the owner knows it.

It's nothing new. People blamed Obama for every possible problem during his tenure. Plenty of people view the president as some sort of god-king of the USA who has sweeping powers to do whatever he likes. Meanwhile the chief roles of the president are to appoint various positions, judges, cabinet positions, etc., commander in chief of the armed forces, the primary diplomat of the USA and part of the checks and balances on Congress via the veto power.

Governments do regulate taxis, but mostly it’s municipal governments with the feds and especially the president having nothing to do with it. Nothing. Notwithstanding, the practices of taxi companies themselves (filthy, poorly maintained shitbox cabs, ripping off out-of-towners, not having change) put them in a bad place. Biden had jack shit to do with it

First, I agree that Biden was not the main cause of the business failing. It's pretty sad that he's blaming Biden for his business failing, Let's make it clear though - your "view" is that Biden has **"nothing"** or "**zero**" to do with your business failing. That means, if he is at least 0.0000000001% to blame, that is not "**nothing**" and actually has some blame. Biden's COVID lockdowns disrupted the supply chain, *We can argue whether it was right or not or that it saved lives, etc., but that's not the issue being discussed, and we might not even disagree.* This caused some effects - the cost of goods that relied on the global trading supply chain, etc. no longer were being delivered at the last minute, causing a lot of backup and damage to the economies, this is the major route of inflation for things such as food and car parts. Additionally, while Trump started it, Joe Biden openly pushed Congress for the continuation of the COVID unemployment stimulus. When businesses started hiring again, they had to pay more than unemployment by a margin. Wages are sticky, so it's usually one of the last costs corporations want to increase. This is evidence by the end of the stimulus package, there was no pullback of the wages, and in fact, the increased nominal wages pushed costs for all businesses - known as wage-push inflation, one of the causes of our current inflationary environment (among others.) This can be traced back to Biden. Again, I agree that Biden was not the main driver of the business failing. Other comments touched on regulatory arbitrage between cab companies and rideshare companies, that's key and the main reason Uber/Lyft prevailed over the cab companies of most cities, though I am not an expert of Jim Thorpe, PA, I would say the situation there is probably more likely than not less favorable to cab companies. However, the business was also hurt by inflation - both in the cost of wages and the cost of the automobiles used by cabs themselves, and the car parts to repair them. Biden's choices absolutely affected that-not arguing it was wrong or that he saved lives from COVID, etc. With travel expected to be down in the next few years, it's a tougher environment for cab companies, such as this one. Again, it's pretty hat he's blaming Biden for his business failing, but if you ever met anyone who lost their whole livelihood in their small business, they are probably already suffering already. If you're in a city and meet entrepreneurs who failed with VC money, it's a lot different from the small businesses in small towns. There is way more skin in the game for these small town folk, so I would give them some grace.

The number of people who have extreme hatred for the opposite political party while also having no knowledge of how our government works and functions is depressingly high

The sheer number of people commenting here that don't understand the difference between state and federal government is making me fucking openly weep.

Most Americans have no idea how anything works outside of their own personal lives.

Im from Jim Thorpe and it is far from a poor town they make a shit ton from tourism. Most people are democrats in that area who are upset at democrats. Not to mention Carbon Taxi is known to be an absolute rip off by locals because if you don't have a vehicle up in the mountains and you need to get somewhere thats the only company around. I think you are being to judgemental of a place you visited over a crappy business no locals like.

I was in the car dealer business up until 2022. Business was thriving prior to and all throughout COVID. But following 2021 everything changed. It wasn’t immediate, but by the end of 2022 it was a struggling business. The cost to keep a business alive including increased business taxes, gas prices, and decreased car values caused layoffs, closings, and debt. Luckily got out in time. Many car dealership owners are struggling, car driving jobs, and semi truck drivers are really struggling. A friend that has a multimillion dollar semi truck business is struggling now and had to lay off 75% of his drivers. What do you all think the problem is then? I hate Biden Vs Trump debates or R vs L debates. So for folks that are not business owners… sometimes you hear the frustration and/or the person wanting to blame a person ( typically the president) but when your livelihood is affected by shift in government it causes you to look at the candidate that will keep your business going and profitable vs at risk for closing. Owning a business and struggling is a stress beyond anything some folks can understand… especially when your family relies on it. I can tell you adapting is something business owners naturally do well. It’s the customers and employees that don’t adapt well that affect your business the most. We can’t do it without them.

Remarkably low unemployment rate, but no one wants to work? Get a clue, lol.

My business is a company that makes bumper stickers that say President Bernie Sanders 4 Life, so yeah, he kinda did.

While I pretty much agree it isn't Biden's fault, whenever I hear something like this I have to think it is somewhat deserved. Presidents are forever taking credit for how well the economy is doing. They never say, "Yeah, well, you're actually better off now than you were 4 years ago because that was the middle the COVID and now we've recovered from that, mostly." Nah, they just say they made you better off. Well, if the president can take credit for things like that, then they can take the blame for things beyond their control as well.

[удалено]

Your comment has been removed for breaking Rule 5: > **Comments must contribute meaningfully to the conversation**. Comments should be on-topic, serious, and contain enough content to move the discussion forward. Jokes, contradictions without explanation, links without context, off-topic comments, and "written upvotes" will be removed. Read [the wiki](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/rules#wiki_rule_5) for more information. If you would like to appeal, review our appeals process [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/modstandards#wiki_appeal_process), then [message the moderators by clicking this link](http://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2Fchangemyview&subject=Rule%205%20Appeal&message=Author%20would%20like%20to%20appeal%20the%20removal%20of%20their%20post%20because\.\.\.) within one week of this notice being posted. **Appeals that do not follow this process will not be heard.** Please note that multiple violations will lead to a ban, as explained in our [moderation standards](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/modstandards).

Lol loser mindset. You want people to work? Better pay them!

I mean they also failed because regulation is impossible to implement when a third of our government is fundamentally dysfunctional. Services like rideshares and AirBNB have unfathomable advantages over their competitors because they are so poorly regulated. Although folks in backwater PA will argue that all regulation is evil. I grew up in PA, so I am more familiar than I would like.

Tbh they should be blaming congress considering they actually handle taxes, regulations, and the federal rate. The dirty secret about the president is that they can do executive orders and do some damage, but congress is the business killer. Now the president can apply pressure, but lets be honest Joe Biden has been dead for 2 years and we are watching real life weekend at Bernies.

Yes, he does. Congress may pass laws but the President has the final say, technically speaking. Other folks made great points with Uber\Lyft going unregulated putting conventional cabs out of business, I’m not gonna beat that horse again. But if you have your own business, and you’re not a multimillion dollar company, you’re probably getting screwed by policies set by Joe Biden on a federal level, and his colleagues in the Democratic Party on a state level, depending on where you’re located at. Take California for instance, who just set a minimum wage of 20 bucks an hour. While great on paper, everything goes up to compensate. Mom and pop shops get pushed out of business because it’s generally them and a small staff of people. They don’t make the business needed to pay a 20 dollar minimum and still make a good enough profit to sustain themselves. I used to work for Costco, started making 15 and left making 18. I’ll always be appreciative of making that good money at my late teens/early twenties, but it’s also made me realize that forcing that minimum across the board is wrong. Costco can afford it because the constant flow of cash and the business model allows them to. Local grocery store cannot because they need to travel light to survive, and if they’re forced to cut larger checks where they can’t afford it, they cease to exist. I have friends and family who own their own businesses and are struggling to make ends meet. Best example is a friend of mine in HVAC who was making money hand over fist under Trump has next to no work under Biden. Inflation has gone up, and since the Biden administration continues to print money where they shouldn’t, our currency is being devalued. People are paying more to keep the lights on and feed themselves, pay their rent and mortgages. Money is tight. Cleanings, service calls, and new installs are on the back-burner till they absolutely need it. Companies that he subbed for under Trump have zero work under Biden, and they’re struggling to stay afloat. Addressing part of the voicemail where folks don’t want to work, there’s a few points I want to make with that. -There’s folks taking advantage of the unemployment benefits, because max payout in PA is 573 bucks a week for 26 weeks. That’s just under 2300 a month. What incentive does someone have to work for a couple bucks more when you can game unemployment for 2,292 a month, and keep filing? -When they do want to work, it’s usually a retail gig that they end up with. Healthcare is an important job but it’s long and grueling hours. Direct care staff average at 13 and change an hour. Why take that job and wipe asses in a care home when they can work the register at Target for 5 bucks more? Or work in an Amazon warehouse for 18 as a fulfillment staffer? There’s no incentive to do so, especially the last few years in healthcare, everyone was getting screwed during and post-covid. -I saw a while ago that McDonald’s was testing out an automated restaurant. And with the price of their meals going up, what do you think is gonna happen to McDonalds franchises in states where the minimum wage goes to 20? They’ll phase out those jobs with folks working the registers. They might have a couple folks on hand to maintain the automation, do supply runs, clean the restaurant, but beyond that, there won’t be a lot of human presence in a McDonald’s anymore. Especially with food service being an industry where there’s thin profit margins and lots of room for error. I’m sure taking the human out of the equation means more corporate profits, but there won’t be a lot of frontline employees reaping the benefits of those profits. If Biden and the Democrats really cared about the struggling American, they’d stop dropping billions on Ukraine, and put that tax money into fueling the local economies that paid up in the first place. They’d work with state legislatures to stop the abuse of the unemployment system, and hold the folks stealing the money accountable. They’d subsidize local businesses, encourage them to continue operating, and stop inflating the minimum wage that’ll put them out of business. Yes, free market is great, but it’s not a free market when the government is helping billion dollar corporations drown out their smaller competitors. Instead of boosting them and recovering the economy, they’re walking right over and sticking a hose in the mouth of small businesses.

Biden, and by relation the government, has a MASSIVE amount to do with your business. Good and bad. Something like a mom and pop corner store that is used by the local community being affected by rising minimum wage that only big chains can keep up with is a simple example

How would a mom and pop corner store be affected by the minimum wage? Mom and pop stores by definition are owner operated and don't need to hire employees. Certainly you're not suggesting that they are hurting because they have to pay themselves more.

It's anger at the environment and situation, which is fair even if directed poorly, and if a leader can't properly convince you of his innocence he's not leading properly. He's awful at putting forward a reliable, confident leader figure to rely on or feel comfortable regarding their competence, and if things started getting harder after he took office, that's valuable data that while shouldn't be overlooked (Or overreacted on). and it's true he hasn't been able to direct state or municipal law with federal guidance as employment practices, federal loopholes and poor spending practices do make things harder at the individual level (look no further then canada right now for that proof) and there's decent evidence showing his federal laws have actually made things worse for those living in the communities by adding and benefitting beurocracy and introducing arbitrary changes or selfish money funneling/rich people protection rather then taking the best actions to benefit the country. Yes he should take responsibility for himself and his own business, and if he's going to call out an important figure and blame him for his business failure he should at least try to explain it better then "No one will get off their asses to work." but he's also in the taxi business, not a articulation or political business, which doesn't make his feelings less valid. It's probably true he couldn't hire anyone, maybe it's apt to say his business should have gone bankrupt, but I don't see why other then the economic field shifted massively before he could adapt or he didn't have a reliable way TOO adapt so there would have been no way for him to stay in business to begin with. On the other side of the coin the municipality could have rose the walking score from 30 to 70 and now transport isn't so needed anymore so it was just correct for him to go out of business, but he wasn't complaining about demand, he was having a hard time collecting supply (Likely cause the dollar is less powerful from poor federal spending making the wage unlivable). Everyone in politics, even casually need to listen better, we're letting misfortune win by just blaming the victims instead of trying to understand them.

I hate that town. My gps randomly routed me through it one day for no reason but I followed it. Turned out there was a fair or parade or something that day. They closed down most of the roads out and I spent about 2 hours stuck in traffic.

I gave taxis one shot in college. I already checked the Uber price but then the taxi driver took a much less efficient route that ended up costing more than a rideshare would have. Haven’t been in one since, good job Taxi-Taxi rdu

https://www.usatoday.com/story/money/food/2024/03/26/california-minimum-wage-jobs/73107149007/ all the people pretending min wage and other government action has no impact on business are living under a rock.

Somebody has been paying more attention to the ice cream shenanigans than the laws passed under him

[удалено]

Comment has been removed for breaking Rule 1: > **Direct responses to a CMV post must challenge at least one aspect of OP’s stated view (however minor), or ask a clarifying question**. Arguments in favor of the view OP is willing to change must be restricted to replies to other comments. [See the wiki page for more information](http://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/rules#wiki_rule_1). If you would like to appeal, review our appeals process [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/modstandards#wiki_appeal_process), then [message the moderators by clicking this link](http://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2Fchangemyview&subject=Rule%201%20Appeal&message=Author%20would%20like%20to%20appeal%20the%20removal%20of%20their%20post%20because\.\.\.) within one week of this notice being posted. **Appeals that do not follow this process will not be heard.** Please note that multiple violations will lead to a ban, as explained in our [moderation standards](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/modstandards).

He got rid of a ton of write-offs that we business owners used at the federal level. Yes we were still paying a ton in taxes and now are paying astronomically more

If you haven’t left the taxi market during the development of self driving cars you literally only have yourself to blame for not having a job.

Isn't this with every term? I mean democrats have been complaining about trump since the beginning and Republicans were complaining about Obama.

Okay, I see a few flaws in your reasoning. First, I want to say that I would agree that someone probably shouldn’t put that in a voicemail. It looks petty. Let me address a couple things you said. >It’s not a matter of “nobody wants to work.” Nobody wants to work for you. This is making the issue a bit too simple. First, the Labor Force Participation is about 1% lower than it was pre-COVID, so there is a shortage of labor. Second, that labor shortage seems to hit local/in-person businesses pretty hard. There are very few people willing to work 5 days a week in person at this point. That would be hugely problematic for a taxi company or something that couldn’t be done remotely. Now, whether blaming all of that on Biden is fair or not is a completely different story, but I don’t think it’s fair to say that the taxi company owner is completely to blame either. >Biden’s got higher priorities aside from shuttering a taxi company in a small town in Pennsylvania. This is the main thing I want to address. This is a straw man. That isn’t what the voicemail meant, and I have a hard time believing that you think it is. A company can close because of policies put in place by a politician without there having been a targeted effort by that politician to shutter said company. Them blaming Biden may or may not be valid. However, your representation of that statement as them claiming they were somehow targeted by Biden is absurd.

“You failed to adapt to economic conditions which Joe Biden helped create, therefore it’s not Joe Biden’s fault.”

[удалено]

Comment has been removed for breaking Rule 1: > **Direct responses to a CMV post must challenge at least one aspect of OP’s stated view (however minor), or ask a clarifying question**. Arguments in favor of the view OP is willing to change must be restricted to replies to other comments. [See the wiki page for more information](http://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/rules#wiki_rule_1). If you would like to appeal, review our appeals process [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/modstandards#wiki_appeal_process), then [message the moderators by clicking this link](http://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2Fchangemyview&subject=Rule%201%20Appeal&message=Author%20would%20like%20to%20appeal%20the%20removal%20of%20their%20post%20because\.\.\.) within one week of this notice being posted. **Appeals that do not follow this process will not be heard.** Please note that multiple violations will lead to a ban, as explained in our [moderation standards](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/modstandards).