Let's Not Let Tragedy Get In the Way of Human Progress
Ben Hogan was one of the world’s leading golfers in the 1940s and 50s, but he had a difficult start in life. His father, Chester Hogan, was a blacksmith at a time the auto industry was eliminating the need for his craft. In 1922, Chester Hogan took his own life.
The death was, like all deaths, a tragedy, especially since Chester Hogan left behind a struggling family that found it even more difficult to make ends meet. But who would suggest that in light of his death the United States and the world should have slowed the development of the automobile in the 1920s? In fact, virtually every new innovation leads to the shedding of some jobs as well as the spawning of new ones – leaving both frustrated workers in sunset industries that have become irrelevant and new opportunities in sunrise industries that have taken off.
Nonetheless, a spate of suicides in New York by cab drivers who have seen their livelihoods disrupted by ride-sharing apps threatens to slow and perhaps even bring to a halt the growth of popular services like Uber and Lyft. In February, a 61-year-old livery driver shot and killed himself outside City Hall, leaving behind a Facebook post declaring that the huge influx of ride-sharing cars in the city had made drivers “desperate” and forced many out of business. Since November, six New York drivers have taken their lives, galvanizing public pressure on the City Council to address the impact of Uber and Lyft.
Even the loss of one life is tragic. But can we allow it to stand in the way of progress? Just a few years ago, there were over 100,000 employees of video stores across the United States. Now, with the invention of Netflix and other streaming services, there are almost none. Fortunately, there are no reported incidents of video store owners or employees taking their own lives as a result. But if there were, would we allow that to prevent innovation?
Nonetheless, New York City Council last month became the first major American city to halt new vehicle licenses for ride-sharing services, imposing a one-year freeze on the number of drivers for Uber and Lyft while the local government studies the effect on the industry. As home to one of the most dynamic economies in the United States, what happens in New York does not stay in New York. The freeze could provide a model for other governments under pressure by semi-monopolistic traditional cab companies and drivers to rein in the industry.
It is disingenuous to point out that there are already over 100,000 Uber and Lyft drivers on New York’s roads, and city council’s action will not threaten those existing jobs. The ride sharing workforce is extremely flexible. Many if not most drivers may not be on the road from one year to the next. Imposing a cap, even a temporary one, can slow or even halt development of a dynamic new industry – one that provides flexible employment for those who need it, such as students, and ensures more options for passengers.
Services like Uber and Lyft play an important role in helping people get where they need to go – which is the whole point of the taxi industry. The cap could produce higher prices and longer wait times for passengers if the company cannot keep up with growing demand.
Prior to the development of ride-sharing services, many parts of the city, particularly in the outer boroughs, were poorly served both by little access to public transportation and a dearth of cabs. Last year, the New York Times reported that Uber trips in 50 residential areas outside Manhattan with little access to public transportation tripled between August 2016 and August 2017. Ride-sharing apps have become a crucial backup option for New Yorkers in neighborhoods that the subway does not reach, and those swept up in constant delays on the city’s sputtering subway
Hailing one of New York’s traditional yellow cabs can be especially difficult for African-American New Yorkers. Curbing ride-sharing services could bring back an era when visible minorities, especially outside Manhattan, struggled to get a cab, as drivers passed them by out of fear or prejudice.
Every economic change seems to bring about a counter-reaction from those with a vested interest in the existing order, such as owners who have seen the value of their medallions drop 80 percent from $1 million to about $200,000. But we have learned that nothing is permanent. Just as taxi cabs displaced horse-drawn carriages, and ride sharing is displacing traditional cabs, change is a permanent – and beneficial – part of life. Someday, autonomous vehicles will likely replace Ubers and Lyfts. The economy is not frozen in time. It changes – often leaving some behind, but always providing greater benefits to consumers and new opportunities for entrepreneurs and workers.
