Like Tree25Likes

Hong Kong Taxi Speculation

Closed Thread
Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 1 2 3 LastLast
  1. #11

    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    猴山
    Posts
    23,652
    Quote Originally Posted by shri:
    Even the taxi driver is a middleman between you, your feet and your destination.
    You can win a Noble prize for that line of thinking

    The Prize in Economics 1991 - Press Release

    http://www3.nccu.edu.tw/~jsfeng/CPEC11.pdf

  2. #12

    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    猴山
    Posts
    23,652
    Original Post Deleted

    3C involving frequent or regular contact, in particular unmonitored contact, with children or MIPs (such as, permanently-hired school bus drivers, assistants of children activities, etc).

    They should be....

    As bus mama's are

    Any form of employment where a person is in effect looking after a child for a period of time should require very basic background checks. It is not un-common for the same taxi to be used to shuttle the same kids to school on a daily basis. This gives the potential long contact time between an adult and kids in a captive unmonitored environment.

    The checks are not onerous.
    Last edited by East_coast; 26-05-2016 at 09:19 AM.
    shri likes this.

  3. #13

    Join Date
    May 2015
    Posts
    3,015
    Quote Originally Posted by shri:

    Why do we need restaurants when you can cook at home and avoid the middle man?

    Why do we need grocery stores when you can travel to a farm and pay the farmer? Oh wait, why do we need a farmer when you can grow you own vegetables and live stock?

    The point I'm trying to make is, middle men are always required - they are the very essence of trade and industry.
    Huh? Your trying to compare a restaurant owner or a grocery store to someone who holds a taxi license?

    The grocery store provides a service, as does the restaurant owner. They actually do something. Remind me again what a taxi license owner does? Not all middle men are the same, some provide a service, while others simply make money for doing nothing.

    In the case of the taxi license owners, they just get rich while driving down the wages of drivers and increasing the fees for the end users. Remove the middle man, and the guy working in the taxi can earn a better living, the end users can pay less and receive better service.

    For a restaurant or grocery store....you can't really remove those middle men. Well, unless you want to drive to the farm and get your food straight from the field
    Last edited by Open Casket; 26-05-2016 at 11:33 AM.
    rsndl likes this.

  4. #14

    Join Date
    Dec 2002
    Location
    薄扶林
    Posts
    47,968
    The grocery store provides a service, as does the restaurant owner.
    As does a taxi license owner or a property owner.

    The only time people pay money for anything is when it benefits them (economic or emotional ...).

    If you're getting paid for ANYTHING, it is because the other person sees value in paying you (typically because that value is more than what they're paying you).

  5. #15

    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Posts
    34
    Quote Originally Posted by shri:
    Because that would mean that people who own apartments must live in them. People who own restaurants must eat in them.
    Don't disagree with the rest of your post - but I don't think you're drawing the correct analogy here. I think a better comparison would be the restaurant license owner. Are restaurant license owners allowed to lease off their business licences?
    Open Casket and Lord Dashwood like this.

  6. #16

    Join Date
    Dec 2002
    Location
    薄扶林
    Posts
    47,968
    Quote Originally Posted by rsndl:
    Don't disagree with the rest of your post - but I don't think you're drawing the correct analogy here. I think a better comparison would be the restaurant license owner. Are restaurant license owners allowed to lease off their business licences?
    I meant that generically as "asset owner" v/s "asset user".

    As far as I know you can lease a restaurant premises with an existing license (you may be limited by that license...).

    Bottom line ... there are people who own commodities that others want to rent. You should not abolish one type of renting and keep another.

    Licenses, memberships, financial instruments, clothes, watches, patents....

  7. #17

    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    6,452

    Let everybody who owns a taxi and has the right drivers license get a taxi license. The government could charge a fee for renewal. The price to share the license accross 3 shifts would than be determinded by the cost of leasing the car.


  8. #18

    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    Hong Kong
    Posts
    3,988
    Quote Originally Posted by shri:
    As far as I know you can lease a restaurant premises with an existing license (you may be limited by that license...).
    afraid not. the licensee can sell the license, but new rules mean you have to comply with today's regulations at the time of transfer, not the regulations in force when the original licence was granted (i.e. no grandfather clause anymore).
    shri and Open Casket like this.

  9. #19

    Join Date
    May 2010
    Posts
    4,713
    Quote Originally Posted by shri:

    Same could be done for property too .. the govt could own all the residential and commercial property in HK and lease it out to users... See where that would end up?
    physical property is tangible and its real. the number of taxi medalions for lease is a number the gov pulled out of their ass.

  10. #20

    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Pearl of the Orient
    Posts
    4,006

    Someone must be feeling a bit sore after paying $7.20M for the licence. Down $1.20M and probably more to come.

    Open Casket likes this.