Today, Naran started a thread that unites 90% of AMGers behind the proposition that Portland’s city hall is right to implement an expensive, job-killing regulation on Maine small businessmen.
Finally, they come around to the dark side! As you friendly neighborhood communist pinko, let me welcome you to the People’s Republic of Portland.
Why would AMGers turn 180 degrees so quickly? Easy answer: In this case the businessmen in question are SOMALI.
The job-killing regulation in question requires taxi drivers, most of whom are African immigrants, to get their taxi license and pay a fee in person rather than through a representative. The city had been letting people use a representative but then decided that their rules didn’t allow it.
The AMG “pro-business” crowd somehow sees nothing wrong with having people stop working to go get a piece of paper in person just because the guv’mint has a rule saying so. If the Somalis don’t like it, why, they are asking for special rights. Got to be that. They are Somalis, after all. It couldn’t possibly be that they are trying to make a living and don’t like a stupid rule, right? That would be something regular Mainers do, not Somalis!
If you call AMGers on this contradiction, as a few posters have, the answer is some variation of “we have all got to play by the rules.”
Melvin Udall says:
The Somali taxi drivers have learned from the same day voting debate. Claim oppression, suppression, and depression. And throw in repression too.
No Melvin. They learned from AMG, where electricians and carpenters complain about housing regulations, where accountants complain about accounting regulations, and where small business owners complain about health care regulations. Complaining about regulations is sort of AsMaineGoes’ reason to exist.
Rarely is it ever said to the regular complaining Maine business people that they need to suck it up and “play by the rules.” What I usually hear is, “Hey, let’s CHANGE the rules, because Ayn Rand wouldn’t have liked them.”
Except when they are Somali.
Weird, huh.
Who would have thought AsMaineGoes would side with Portland City Hall in a story that basically reads, “Small businessmen sue city over useless regulation?”
No one, until you find out exactly who is doing the suing.
Yes, well, rules are rules as Miss Pumpkincheesecake and her Uncle Irwin like to say. But, surely, you’ve noticed this entrenched proceduralism and slavish statism among the AMG faithful before? I admit, this current thread has the added appeal of group-sanctioned racism and an overtly xenophobic pile-on, but surely you’ve noticed how gaga the gang gets when Dan Billings starts to bloviate on points of order? Or how quickly the Randies toss Old Ayn off the train once they win a majority and start with the partisan victory dances: voter IDs, closed borders, police state investigative tactics for every paranoid fantasy they’ve ever entertained…business as usual in the “Public Square”.
As to the issue at hand – I am curious why the City gets/demands a cut of the action? Why limit the number of permits at all? In placing an arbitrary limit, the City artificially increases the value of the permit and creates a patronage system where permission has an inflated value (as opposed to the service: any bloke can drive a cab, but only a few are permitted). The City takes its cut, and so – I imagine – will the permit holder, regardless of whether s/he uses it or not.
I think the theory behind taxi licenses is that if anyone can drive a car around with a “Taxi” sign and pick up people because there is no licensing, you might end up with especially sketchy but also untraceable people doing it just to take advantage of people, rob them, abuse drunk women, etc. The license sort of raises the stakes for people and implies they are traceable, the taxies are numbered, the driver is on file, etc. I know there are ways to get around that like everything else, but you get the idea.
They also have special car inspections, I believe.
And there may also be the thought that too many taxis stacking up everywhere clogs certain roads at some choke points, which hurts regular drivers and ruins everyone’s business, I guess.Limiting the numbers may be more efficient.
These are all just my impressions, I have no expertise.
I get the idea, yes and understand that there are genuine regulatory expenses and accommodations that the city makes for the permit-holders (and by extension, the drivers, who may or may not be the permit holders). My guess is that PoA is not the critical issue, and that the City won’t press on that point.
I would think they ought to just change the rule, but then AMGers won’t be able to ride taxis in Portland because any terrorist can get a PoA.